Greater tree species diversity and lower intraspecific competition attenuate impacts from temperature increases and insect epidemics in boreal forests of western Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated how the surrounding environment influences the growth of dominant trees and their responses to temperature and insect epidemics in boreal forests of eastern Canada. We focused on 82 black spruce and jack pine focal trees in stands spanning a double gradient of species diversity and soil texture within a 36 km2 area of western Quebec. For these trees, we compared their diameter at breast height, growth rates, temperature–growth relations, and growth during insect defoliator epidemics. We used linear models to study how surrounding tree attributes and soil properties affected the growth of focal trees. Models showed that tree growth responses and responses to temperature and insect epidemics were generally negative with higher intraspecific competition and positive with greater tree species diversity. Growth of both species benefitted from lower soil sand content. Our research offers novel insights on the potential role of the surrounding environment, notably tree competition and species diversity, in mitigating the vulnerability of eastern Canada's boreal trees to anthropogenic climate change and insect epidemics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".