MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Rapid functional shifts in natural boreal forests over the last 65 years

2022· preprint· en· W4220827068 on OpenAlexaffabout
Masumi Hisano, Han Y. H. Chen, Masahiro Ryo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTree-ring climate responses
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomeTaigaBorealClimate changeEcologyDeciduousTemperate climateTemperate forestTemperate rainforestEnvironmental scienceEcosystemGlobal warmingGlobal changeEnvironmental changePlant functional typeGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest composition is critical for its functioning. While global environmental changes have modified forest composition, it remains unclear how temporal shifts in functional composition differ across regions and biomes. Using extensive spatial and long-term forest inventory data (17,107 plots monitored 1951–2016) across Canada, we found that functional composition shifted toward fast-growing deciduous broadleaved trees and higher drought tolerance over time; notably, this functional shift was more rapid in colder regions (boreal biome). Further, the functional composition of colder plots shifted toward drought tolerance more rapidly with rising CO2 than warmer plots (temperate biome), suggesting the vulnerability of boreal forests against global environmental changes. Future ecosystem management practices should consider spatial differences in functional responses to global environmental change, with attention to boreal forests experiencing higher rates of warming and compositional changes.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTree-ring climate responses→French-language works237,207→