Positive effects of projected climate change on post-disturbance forest regrowth rates in northeastern North American boreal forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Forest anthropogenic and natural stand-replacing disturbances are increasing worldwide due to global change. Many uncertainties regarding the regeneration and growth of these young forests remain within the context of changing climate. In this study, we investigate the effects of climate, tree species composition, and other landscape-scale environmental variables upon boreal forest regrowth following clearcut logging in eastern Canada. Our main objective was to predict the effects of future climate changes upon post-logging forest height regrowth at a subcontinental scale using high spatial resolution remote sensing data. We modeled forest canopy height (estimated from airborne laser scanning [LiDAR] data over 20 m resolution virtual plots) as a function of time elapsed since the last clearcut along with climate (i.e. temperature and moisture), tree species composition, and other environmental variables (e.g. topography and soil hydrology). Once trained and validated with ∼240 000 plots, the model that was developed in this study was used to predict potential post-logging canopy height regrowth at 20 m resolution across a 240 000 km 2 area following scenarios depicting a range of projected changes in temperature and moisture across the region for 2041–2070. Our results predict an overall beneficial, but limited effect of projected climate changes upon forest regrowth rates in our study area. Stimulatory effects of projected climate change were more pronounced for conifer forests, with growth rates increasing between +5% and +50% over the study area, while mixed and broadleaved forests recorded changes that mostly ranged from −5% to +35%. Predicted increased regrowth rates were mainly associated with increased temperature, while changes in climate moisture had a minor effect. We conclude that such growth gains could partially compensate for the inevitable increase in natural disturbances but should not allow any increase in harvested volumes.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".