Early treatment effects on plantation growth and biodiversity in mature ponderosa pine forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We address the concerns that managed forest plantations may cause reductions of diversity of understory vegetation. We performed inventories of two mature ponderosa pine plantations in which multiple treatments were applied during plantation establishment. At stand age 35, we measured tree heights and diameters, understory plant cover and diversity, soil nutrients and chemical properties, and soil microbial biomass and diversity with phospholipid fatty acid. We found a significant, positive effect from both herbicide (H) and fertilizer (F) applications on subsequent overstory tree growth and development ( P < 0.05); insecticide (I) effect was minimal. We observed negative effects on understory plant diversity decades later when herbicide was applied during stand establishment. However, lower plant diversity and ground cover appeared to have been caused primarily from overstory canopy closure, supported by the increased understory cover and diversity observed in the HI and HFI plots that had been thinned at age 12. Similarly, while fertilizer increased tree growth at both sites, it only negatively affected understory plants at the higher quality site. We did not find significant influence of treatment effects on soil nutrients and microbial communities. Therefore, to mitigate the potential loss of understory biodiversity in plantations, foresters can manage overstory trees with traditional pre-commercial thinning techniques and early tending.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".