MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220940903 · doi:10.3390/land11030446

Forest Management under Climate Change: A Decision Analysis of Thinning Interventions for Water Services and Biomass in a Norway Spruce Stand in South Germany

2022· article· en· W4220940903 on OpenAlexaff
Simant Rimal, Marc Djahangard, Rasoul Yousefpour

Bibliographic record

VenueLand · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsThinningEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)EvapotranspirationForest managementClimate changeSilvicultureAgroforestryAgronomyForestryEcologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is producing threats to forests’ capacity of regulating water regimes. Therefore, thinning strategies can be applied to mitigate climate change impacts more efficiently by providing more spaces for trees to utilize resources e.g., water and nutrients. This study examined the effects of different thinning intensities and intervals on water characteristics and biomass growth of a 75-year-old Norway spruce (Picea abies) stand in the Black Forest, Germany. Here we used a water and management sensitive update of the process-based forest growth model 3PG, 3PG-Hydro. We applied light (10%), moderate (30%), and heavy thinning (50% intensity) in the interval of 10, 25, and 50 years of the management period. We simulated growth with climate change scenario RCP 8.5 data from 1995 to 2065. We analyzed the effects of the different thinning regimens on biomass, evapotranspiration as well as water yield. Thinning intensity and interval as well as their interaction have significant influence on production of stand biomass and water yield for all thinning regimes applied (p < 0.05). However, there is no significant difference (p > 0.05) in accumulated biomass (thinned biomass added to the stand biomass) between the applied thinning regimes. Light thinning in a long interval (50 years) produced highest stand biomass among the applied thinning regimes. Furthermore, the prediction showed that accumulated water yield increased with increasing thinning intensity. Our study concludes that repeated moderate thinning at intermediate intervals results in a high water yield without losing biomass production.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLandSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207