MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3016313717 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2019-0334

A flexible approach for predicting and mapping postfire wood borer attacks in black spruce and jack pine forests using the differenced normalized burn ratio (dNBR)

2020· article· en· W3016313717 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jonathan Boucher, Christian Hébert, Éric Bauce

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsCentre de Géomatique du QuébecNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlack spruceForestryBasal areaJack pinePinus <genus>Salvage loggingEnvironmental scienceThinningHorticultureTaigaBiologyBotanySnagEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postfire salvage logging is used to reduce economic losses; however, burned trees are rapidly colonized by wood-boring insects, which reduce the merchantable value of the wood. This study aims to predict wood borer (Monochamus Megerle in Dejean, 1821) attacks after wildfire as a function of rapidly available variables such as tree basal area, stem diameter, and burn severity using the differenced normalized burn ratio (dNBR). In 2011, we sampled 60 black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) Britton, Sterns & Poggenb.) or jack pine (Pinus banksiana Lamb.) plots in five burns from 2010 in the Haute-Mauricie region of Quebec, Canada. A 50 cm bole section was debarked on seven trees in each plot to estimate wood borer attack density. Wood borer attacks were more abundant in black spruce than in jack pine. As a continuous variable, dNBR unveiled a quadratic effect of burn severity on attack density in black spruce, which was higher at moderate burn severity. In jack pine, the highest levels of attack density were found at high burn severity. Models produced in this article will help forest managers to better prioritize areas for salvage logging and thus reduce economic losses due to wood borer activity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→