MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415254172 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2025-0235

Long-term effects of spruce budworm outbreak and insecticide protection on forest recovery and structure in Eastern Quebec

2025· article· en· W4415254172 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Álvaro Fuentealba, Éric Bauce

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sainte FoySociété de Protection des Forêts contre les Insectes et MaladiesUniversité LavalCentre de Géomatique du Québec
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpruce budwormBalsamOutbreakChoristoneura fumiferanaAbies balsameaProductivityThinningPEST analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insect outbreaks can significantly alter forest structure through tree mortality. While surviving trees often exhibit growth release, overall productivity may still decline. Aerial insecticide applications have been widely used in Canada to mitigate spruce budworm ( Choristoneura fumiferana) impacts, though their long-term effects remain poorly understood. This study assessed the long-term impacts of the 1967–1992 outbreak, 12 years after its collapse, in protected and unprotected mixed forests in Eastern Quebec. We evaluated growth release at tree- and stand-levels, stand recovery duration, structural changes, and the influence of spraying. We remeasured 78 permanent 500 m 2 plots, recording DBH for all commercial species ≥10 cm and classifying stems as alive or dead. Growth losses were assessed via stem analysis. Balsam fir ( Abies balsamea) mortality was significantly higher in poorly protected plots (45.33%–57.11%) compared to well-protected ones (<25%). Surviving trees showed growth release across treatments, but only average- or well-protected plots had improved productivity and faster recovery. Poorly protected plots showed higher mortality, limited recovery, and more pronounced thinning effects compared to well-protected plots, with smaller trees most affected. The outbreak caused growth losses equal to 16 years for balsam fir, highlighting the need to prioritize this species in protection programs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicForest Insect Ecology and Management→French-language works237,207→