Factors Driving Changes in Plant Understory Communities Between Coniferous and Broadleaf Deciduous Boreal Forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photo 1. We used adjacent stands dominated by black spruce (left panel: Picea mariana) and trembling aspen (right panel: Populus tremuloides) in Eastern Canada. Spruce forests are dominated by bryophytes and ericaceous plants, whereas aspen forests have a diverse understory dominated by several herbs and shrubs species. Photo credit: Juanita C. Rodríguez-Rodríguez. Photo 2. Overstory view of forests dominated by black spruce (left panel) and trembling aspen (right panel) in the boreal forest of Québec, Canada. Spruce needleleaf litter decomposes more slowly and acidifies soil conditions, whereas the nutrient-rich aspen broadleaved litter decomposes more easily, which favors nutrient availability in aspen understories. Photo credit: Juanita C. Rodríguez-Rodríguez. Photo 3. Main treatments that affected understory vegetation. The aspen broadleaf litter addition in spruce forests (top left panel) negatively affected the moss-dominated understory, in contrast to the addition of spruce needleleaf litter in aspen forests (top right panel), which did not affect plant understory communities over time. The transplanted aspen understory into spruce forests (bottom left panel) resisted 5 years after transplantation and started to colonize outside the plot. In contrast, the transplanted spruce understory into aspen forests (bottom right panel) was invaded by the aspen understory over time. Photographs taken after 5 years of treatments in 2018. Photo credit: Juanita C. Rodríguez-Rodríguez. Photo 4. Some plant understory species found in both black spruce and trembling aspen forests. Cornus canadensis (top left panel), Plagiomnium sp. (top right panel), Pleurozium schreberi (middle left panel), Rubus pubescens, and Linnaea borealis (middle right panel), the shrub Ribes triste (bottom left panel), Vaccinium sp. (bottom middle panel), Rhododendron groenlandicum (bottom right panel). Photo credit: Juanita C. Rodríguez-Rodríguez. These photographs illustrate the article “Drivers of contrasting boreal understory vegetation in coniferous and broadleaf deciduous alternative states” by Juanita C. Rodríguez-Rodríguez, Nicole J. Fenton, Steven W. Kembel, Evick Mestre, Mélanie Jean, and Yves Bergeron published in Ecological Monographs. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1587
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".