TAMM review: Continuous root forestry—Living roots sustain the belowground ecosystem and soil carbon in managed forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An estimated half of the carbon fixed by trees is transported belowground, a portion of which is exuded into the soil where it fuels a complex belowground food web. The biological transformation of exudates into microbial metabolites and necromass is a major source of soil organic matter (SOM), including persistent mineral-associated organic matter (MAOM). Recent recognition of the fundamental importance of these inputs from living roots for sustaining life belowground and replenishing SOM demands a rethinking of how we harvest forests. By severing the lifeline of living roots, clearcut harvesting devastates much of the belowground biodiversity in forests, and prohibits a principal pathway through which SOM and C stocks are replenished. Retention harvesting retains the influence of living roots within retention patches and potentially throughout the harvested area, but only if inter-tree distances are 15 m or less. Retention trees sustain and support the re-establishment of belowground life and function following forest harvest and may mitigate post-harvest soil C losses. Sustaining the belowground ecosystem via inputs from living roots is an underappreciated benefit of continuous-cover and retention forestry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".