MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413927328 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/adfcef

Whitebark pine in the United States projected to experience an 80% reduction in climatically suitable area by the mid-21st century

2025· article· en· W4413927328 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sean A. Parks, Kira L. Hefty, Jaclyn Fox Rushing, Sara A. Goeking, Diana F. Tomback, Sharon M. Hood, J Christopher Toney, Destin L Harrell, Cameron E. Naficy, Michèle R. Slaton, B. Soderquist, Erana J. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReduction (mathematics)ClimatologyEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyGeographyGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Whitebark pine (WBP; Pinus albicaulis ) is a five-needle conifer tree species native to the western United States (US) and southwestern Canada. In the US, this ecologically important species is listed as ‘threatened’ under the Endangered Species Act because of population declines from compound stressors, including climate change, introduced white pine blister rust (WPBR), widespread outbreaks of mountain pine beetle, and altered fire regimes. Species recovery depends primarily on planting WBP seedlings that are resistant to WPBR, but suitable planting locations are likely to shift under climate warming. We modeled and mapped WBP climatic suitability in the US using forest inventory data and fine-scale (∼220 m) climate datasets under reference period (1961–1990) and mid-21st century climatic conditions. We projected an 80% reduction in the area climatically suitable for WBP by the mid-21st century. Moreover, 75% of the climatically suitable area for WBP under mid-21st century climate is located in designated wilderness areas and national parks. This could challenge WBP recovery efforts, as these protected areas strive to reduce human manipulation of ecological systems. WBP climate suitability maps resulting from our models can be used to identify priority or ‘target areas’ where planting will have the highest likelihood of success and to identify areas within the WPB’s current range that are most vulnerable to rapid change should high-severity wildfires or mountain pine beetle outbreaks occur. Mapping WBP reference period and mid-21st century climate suitability is a fundamental step to efficiently prioritize restoration areas and develop a successful recovery program.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207