MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403019391 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2023-0225

Combining thinning and diverse plantings to adapt to climate-change-induced timber supply shortage in British Columbia

2024· article· en· W4403019391 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Valentine Lafond, Adam Polinko, Cosmin D. Man, Caren C. Dymond, Gregory Paradis, Verena C. Griess

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsGovernment of British ColumbiaInro Consultants (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsThinningEconomic shortageClimate changeForestryLoggingAgroforestrySilvicultureEnvironmental scienceGeographyEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forestry is an important component of Canada’s economy with British Columbia (BC) contributing almost half to the national roundwood production. Yet, the country’s timber supply and forest economy are threatened by climate change, with increased frequency and severity of natural disturbances and changes in forest productivity. Mountain pine beetle ( Dendroctonus ponderosae) outbreaks are endemic in BC, but the latest climate change-driven outbreak has resulted in a cumulative loss of over half of all merchantable pine, leading to a mid-term timber supply shortage. In this study, we investigate the potential of commercial thinning and alternative planting regimes based on species diversification and assisted species migration to mitigate the anticipated decrease in timber supply in BC. We simulated the long-term effects of these management options in a case study area in interior BC, using a toolbox that combines management- and research-oriented data and models. We found that combining commercial thinning and species diversification has the best potential to mitigate future timber supply shortages in BC. We discuss the limits of this toolbox approach and identify research needs and recommendations for future studies aiming at modelling cumulative effects of management, climate change, and natural disturbances on timber supply.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207