MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307291926 · doi:10.3390/f13111760

Stuck between the Mandibles of an Insect and of a Rodent: Where Does the Fate of Ash-Dominated Riparian Temperate Forests Lie?

2022· article· en· W4307291926 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Samuel Rosner, Angélique Dupuch, François Lorenzetti

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersMitacs
KeywordsFraxinusEmerald ash borerRiparian forestTemperate climateEcologyBiologyBeaverTemperate rainforestRiparian zoneBotanyForestryGeographyEcosystemHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The beaver (Castor canadensis Khul) is a key species that is known to shape the composition of riparian forests. Ash trees (Fraxinus spp.) can be abundant in these forests. However, invasion by the emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire) in North America threatens their survival. The disappearance of ash will have a large impact on the riparian forest composition in itself. It is not known what the consequences would be for the remaining forest if ash plays an important role in the beaver diet. Inventory plots across an ash gradient were measured in Plaisance National Park, Quebec, Canada, to collect data and to establish if (1) trees and saplings of this genus were selected or avoided by beavers, (2) if other genera had a lower or a greater probability of being consumed compared to ash, and (3) if ash density could affect the probability of consumption of other genera. Of all genera present in the park, ash trees were selected in the highest number of plots. Only two genera, Carpinus and Populus, had a higher probability of being consumed than ash. These genera are not abundant in the park, and neither in riparian forests of the temperate biome, and thus are not good candidates to replace ash as a staple for beavers. The most abundant genus in riparian temperate forests, along with ash, is Acer. In this study, Acer trees were not selected, and as for Acer saplings, were less likely to be consumed than ash. Mixed results were obtained about genera that could become more likely to be consumed as ash density decreases. It would seem that the disappearance of ash would not cause a switch to a single or a few genera in the future, which may be due to the high diversity of genera present in temperate riparian forests. However, ash may not disappear completely due to its capacity to sprout following the death of the aboveground portion of ash trees. This scenario is discussed in light of the susceptibility of intermediate-sized ash stems to be colonized by the emerald ash borer and of the greater likelihood of beavers to feed on these same-sized stems.

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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207