MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415815514 · doi:10.5558/tfc2025-026

Contemporary Issues in Québec’s Temperate Forest — Part 3: Air Pollutants

2025· article· en· W4415815514 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Louis Duchesne, Rock Ouimet, François Guillemette, Steve Bédard

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to elevated CO2
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollutantAir pollutionTemperate climateAcid rainTemperate rainforestTemperate forestAir pollutantsEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is the third in a series documenting contemporary issues in Québec’s temperate forest. It addresses air pollutants, including the acidifying air pollutants that cause acid rain, as well as ground-level ozone and trace elements. It briefly discusses the anthropogenic sources of these pollutants, their current status, their impacts on forest ecosystems and the issues they cause for Québec’s temperate forest. Most air pollutants come from combustion of fossil fuels for energy production or transportation. Since the mid-1990s, thanks to pollutant emission reduction programs implemented in Canada and the United States, emissions and ambient air concentrations of most pollutants have declined significantly. Sugar maple ( Acer saccharum Marsh.), a dominant species in the northern temperate zone, is especially sensitive to air pollutants and their impacts for ecosystems. Previous chronic pollution of these forests has resulted in significant loss of ecosystem services. However, environmental monitoring is ongoing with a view to documenting ecosystem reactions in the wake of contemporary decreases in anthropogenic emissions of air pollutants in North America.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicPlant responses to elevated CO2French-language works237,207