MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416083236 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ae1d95

Climate benefits of afforestation and reforestation with varying species mixtures and densities in the north-western boreal lands

2025· article· en· W4416083236 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Enoch Ofosu, Kevin Bradley Dsouza, Daniel Chukwuemeka Amaogu, Richard Boudreault, Juan Moreno‐Cruz, Pooneh Maghoul, Yuri Leonenko

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReforestationAfforestationEvergreenDeciduousTaigaCarbon sequestrationBorealMonocultureClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The boreal forest is a vital carbon sink. Using 250 year simulations for Canada’s Taiga Plains, a priority of the 2 billion trees program, we tested afforestation and reforestation (A/R) strategies that combine species mix, planting density and surface albedo. Medium-density (600–1400 trees ha −1 ) mixed stands with ∼25%–40% deciduous trees stored 15%–30% more net ecosystem carbon than conifer monocultures by coupling rapid early growth with long-term retention and greater disturbance resilience. Replanting under-stocked stands with these mixtures raised long-term storage by 18%–30% over business-as-usual. Accounting for albedo showed pure evergreen or deciduous stands lost 6%–20% of their climate benefit, whereas mixed stands yielded net cooling and the highest sequestration (≈ 4.6–4.7 tCO ₂ e ha −1 yr −1 ). Partial harvesting plus replanting preserved, and sometimes increased, ecosystem carbon (≈ 300–340 tC ha −1 ) and productivity (≈ 1.6–2.0 tC ha −1 yr −1 ) without raising risk. Blending fast-growing deciduous trees with long-lived conifers at intermediate density maximizes boreal A/R climate value and informs reforestation policy elsewhere.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.247
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207