Gap disturbances in northern old‐growth forests of British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We characterized the abundance, size and spatial patterning of canopy gaps, as well as gap‐forming processes and light availability in boreal, sub‐boreal, northern temperate and subalpine old‐growth forests of northwestern British Columbia. The proportion of area in canopy gaps ranged from 32% in northern temperate forests to 73% in subalpine forests. Evenly distributed developmental gaps were dominant but permanent openings created by edaphic components and by shrub communities were also common, particularly in subboreal forests. Abundant gaps, large gap sizes, high numbers of gap makers per gap and frequent gap expansion events suggest that gaps have long tenure in these forests. Snapped stems and standing dead mortality were the most common modes of mortality in all forest types resulting in little forest floor disturbance, creating few germination sites for seedling establishment. We found high mean light levels (16–27% full sun) and little difference between non‐gap and gap light environments. Our results suggest that gap dynamics in these forests differ fundamentally from those in temperate and tropical forest ecosystems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".