Forest fire in the mountain ranges of north-eastern British Columbia: a historical perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to sustain biological diversity, it has been proposed that the impacts of forest management approximate the effects of natural disturbances. This study has investigated mountainous sub-boreal spruce (SBSvk) and Engelmann spruce-subalpine fir (ESSFwk2/wc3) biogeoclimatic units in north-eastern British Columbia in an effort to provide information on historical fire regimes. This information may help in the development of forest management plans that better approximate ecological processes. The influence of topography on the spatial and temporal extent of sera! age-class patches and contemporary lightning-caused fires was a primary focus in this study. Natural disturbance patch characteristics were described and estimates were calculated of the periodicity of stand-initiating disturbances. A digital elevation model was constructed for the study area and related to age-class information derived from forest cover data, as well as lightning-caused fire location data for the period of 1950-1992. Results showed strong spatial differences in natural disturbance patch characteristics based on landscape orientation. Patch characteristics for both eastern and western slopes of the Rocky Mountains indicated that current estimates of patch size distributions and the periodicity of stand-replacing disturbances do not well approximate historical landscape patterns for the 100 year period prior to 1950. Topography was revealed to have a strong relationship with age-class patch size on western slopes, but it was only weakly correlated with other patch characteristics on western and eastern slopes. The topographical associations of lightning-caused fires and seral patches were somewhat similar, but could not provide conclusive evidence that fires initiated younger forest patches. The dominance of old- growth forest age-classes in the study landscape provided support for the importance of fine-scale or non-stand replacing natural disturbances in the maintenance of forest structure and composition. Explicit consideration of landscape characteristics is recommended in future attempts to approximate natural disturbances.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".