MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415815385 · doi:10.5558/tfc2025-021

Simulating potential effects of climate change scenarios on the succession of temperate tree species in eastern Canadian forests

2025· article· en· W4415815385 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Guy R. Larocque, F. Wayne Bell, Eric B. Searle, Stephen J. Mayor, Mathew Leitch, Connor Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityNatural Resources CanadaOntario Forest Research InstituteCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbies balsameaClimate changeBalsamTemperate forestForest dynamicsEcological successionBasal areaTemperate climate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is ample relevant literature on the potential effects of climate change on forest ecosystems. However, the majority of studies have focused on analyzing the effects of increase in temperature or atmospheric CO 2 on specific processes over short periods of time. This may be explained by the difficulty of implementing long-term field experiments to monitor changes that occur very slowly in forest ecosystems. Forest simulation models may contribute to evaluating long-term changes in forest dynamics under different scenarios of climate change. However, as models are continually developed, there is a need to evaluate their biological consistency and realism of their predictions. The gap model ZELIG-CFS was used to simulate the long-term effects of climate change scenarios Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 4.5 and 8.5 on the dynamics of seventeen temperate tree species in Nova Scotia, eastern Canada. A dataset of 454 permanent sample plots was assembled, which consisted mostly of mixed stands. The simulation results indicated that the effects of climate change differed among species. Some species, such as balsam fir ( Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.), were negatively affected under RCP 4.5 and 8.5 scenarios by showing a decrease in mean basal area, stand density and diameter at breast height. In contrast, other species, such as trembling aspen ( Populus tremuloides Michx.), increased their abundance. The simulated responses of the species were discussed in the light of their autecology.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry Chronicle→Same topicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change→French-language works237,207→