Seasonal bird communities in Shelterwood harvests and unmanaged mature forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective bird conservation planning requires consideration of year-round habitat requirements. We evaluated how bird communities differed across seasons, and between young shelterwood (SW) and unmanaged mature (M) hardwood forests over 8 years. We detected 3952 individuals of 82 bird species within transects. Total abundance, richness, and diversity were highest in summer and lowest in winter. Richness was greater in SW than M during all seasons; abundance and diversity were greater in SW during summer, fall, and spring. Community composition differed between SW and M during all seasons except winter. Within seasons, abundance of most analyzed species was greater in SW than M or similar between the treatments. In SW young forest habitat suitability for most species (except indigo buntings) persisted for at least 8 years. Residency guilds and some species showed greater habitat selectivity in some seasons (heavier use of SW) than others (similar use of both SW and M). Our study illustrates the important role of young forests in promoting bird diversity year-round. However, knowledge gaps remain regarding bird use of all forest age-classes during all seasons, and how long dynamically changing young forests support more birds and bird species than mature forest during non-breeding seasons.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".