Spatio-temporal variations in past extreme tree-growth reduction events and their resilience components over northern high-latitude regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Terrestrial forest ecosystems in northern high-latitude regions are crucial to the global carbon cycle and climate system but vulnerable to climate change. Global warming has contributed to increased forest decay and mortality in this region. Despite decades of research on temporal variability, the long-term stability and regional representativeness of resilience components remain poorly understood, limiting our ability to predict future forest resilience. Hence, this study aimed to examine past extreme tree-growth reduction (EGR) events and the associated resilience components across northern high-latitude regions. Methods This study estimated the past EGR events and associated resilience components using the tree-ring width index (RWI) data from 523 International Tree-Ring Data Bank (ITRDB) sites across the northern high-latitude regions and analyzed the spatial and temporal variations in resilience. Results No significant regional differences were found in the frequency of EGR events over the past several hundred years; however, the resilience components exhibited large spatial variations with significant regional differences. The regional-averaged resilience (Rs) over the entire analysis period was lower in Canada than in Alaska, Eurasia, or Europe, suggesting a possible higher vulnerability to EGR events in Canada. Discussion The high vulnerability in Canada was not attributed to the large reduction in growth during the EGR event but to the small amount of recovery (Rc) after the event. As almost no significant temporal changes were observed with respect to regional differences in the resilience components over the four analysis periods, that is, (i) pre-1700, (ii) 1701–1800, (iii) 1801–1900, and (iv) post-1900, the resilience components estimated in this study could be considered as representative values for each region, and the pattern of regional difference remained relatively consistent from the past to the present and likely into the future. These results are crucial to understand future tree and forest dynamics in the high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, particularly regarding risks associated with tree decline and mortality due to climate extremes and other disturbance factors.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".