Woodland salamander population structure and body condition under irregular shelterwood systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecosystem-based management aims to preserve old-growth forest attributes using techniques mimicking natural disturbances. One such technique is irregular shelterwood logging, but its impacts on forest floor organisms are poorly known. Our objective was to quantify the effects of three different treatments of irregular shelterwood on population structure and the body condition of the eastern red-backed salamander (Plethodon cinereus) 5–6 years following harvesting. A total of 64 sites in western Québec were sampled using artificial refugia and quadrat searches. Large salamanders (>32 mm) were more abundant in the gap treatment than in strip, uniform, or control treatments. Small salamanders (≤32 mm) followed the same pattern, although the differences were marginal. For a given treatment, small salamanders were as abundant as large salamanders. Salamander body condition differed between the 2 years of sampling but did not differ among treatments, regardless of salamander size. We conclude that environmental conditions in irregular shelterwood treatments 5–6 years following harvesting support populations of small vertebrates on the forest floor.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".