Modelling the potential of forest management to mitigate climate change in Eastern Canadian forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Climate change poses a serious risk to sustainable forest management, particularly in boreal forests where natural disturbances have been projected to become more severe. In three Quebec boreal forest management units, biomass carbon storage under various climate change and management scenarios was projected over 300 years (2010–2310) with a process-based dynamic landscape model (PnET-succession for Landis-II). Several strategies varying in their use of partial cuts and clear cuts, including business as usual (BAU) (clear-cut applied on more than 95% of the managed area), were tested and compared to conservation scenarios (no-harvest). Based on simulation results at the landscape scale, the clearcut-based scenarios such as BAU could result in a decrease of biomass carbon stock by 10 tC ha−1 yr−1 compared to the natural scenario. However, this reduction in carbon stock could be offset in the long term through changes in composition, as clearcut systems promote the expansion of trembling aspen and white birch. In contrast, the use of strategies based on partial cuts on more than 75% or 50% of the managed area was closer to or better than the natural scenario and resulted in greater coniferous cover retention. These strategies seemed to be the best to maximize and stabilize biomass carbon storage and ensure wood supply under different climate change scenarios, yet they would require further access and appropriate infrastructure. Furthermore, these strategies could maintain species compositions and age structures similar to natural scenarios, and thus may consequently help achieve forest ecosystem-based management targets. This study presents promising strategies to guide sustainable forest management in Eastern Canada in the context of climate change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".