Succession in sub‐boreal forests of West‐Central British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Structural and compositional changes were analysed over the course of 400+ yr of post‐fire succession in the sub‐boreal forests of west‐central British Columbia. Using a chronosequence of 57 stands ranging from 11 to 438 yr in age, we examined changes in forest structure and composition with complementary PCA and DCA ordination techniques. To determine stand ages and timing of tree recruitment, approximately 1800 trees were aged. Most early successional forests were dominated by Pinus contorta , which established rapidly following fire. Abies lasiocarpa and Picea glauca × engel‐mannii were also able to establish quickly, but continued to establish throughout the sere. Few Pinus contorta survived beyond 200 yr, resulting in major changes in forest structure. In some stands P. contorta never established, which led to considerable variation among stands less than 200 yr old. The oldest forests converged on dominance by Abies lasiocarpa. Vascular plant diversity decreased during succession whereas canopy structure became more complex as gap dynamics developed. Although these sub‐boreal forests contain few tree species, successional changes were pronounced, with structure changing more than composition across the chronosequence.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".