The distribution of tree biomass carbon within the Pacific Coastal Temperate Rainforest, a disproportionally carbon dense forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatially explicit global estimates of forest carbon storage are typically coarsely scaled. While useful, these estimates do not account for the variability and distribution of carbon at management scales. We asked how climate, topography, and disturbance regimes interact across and within geopolitical boundaries to influence tree biomass carbon, using the perhumid region of the Pacific Coastal Temperate Rainforest, an infrequently disturbed carbon dense landscape, as a test case. We leveraged permanent sample plots in southeast Alaska and coastal British Columbia and used multiple quantile regression forests and generalized linear models to estimate tree biomass carbon stocks and the effects of topography, climate, and disturbance regimes. We estimate tree biomass carbon stocks are either 211 (SD = 163) Mg C ha−1 or 218 (SD = 169) Mg C ha−1. Natural disturbance regimes had no correlation with tree biomass but logging decreased tree biomass carbon and the effect diminished with increasing time since logging. Despite accounting for 0.3% of global forest area, this forest stores between 0.63% and 1.07% of global aboveground forest carbon as aboveground live tree biomass. The disparate impact of logging and natural disturbance regimes on tree biomass carbon suggests a mismatch between current forest management and disturbance history.
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 | 0.000 | 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".