MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037449576

The distribution and role of downed woody debris in nutrient retention and cycling during early stand establishment

2013· dissertation· en· W7037449576 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsNutrientCoarse woody debrisCyclingEcosystemSoil waterNutrient cycleForest floorSoil nutrientsHydrology (agriculture)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coarse woody debris (CWD) in boreal ecosystems has been hypothesized to play an important nutritional role following stand-replacing disturbances such as fire or harvest. Sites with shallow soil over bedrock or those with coarse textured soils can be especially susceptible to overstory removal as low carbon and nutrient pools may limit stand productivity in subsequent rotations. \nThis dissertation includes results from a series of in-situ and ex-situ experiments examining the nutritional role of CWD. The ex-situ experiment was designed to evaluate whether species (aspen, spruce), origin (fire, harvest), and/or decay class (1-5) influence the timing, and rate of nutrient release from CWD. Source/sink relationships of CWD leachate were largely a function of CWD decay stage for C (source, peaking at decay class 4 and then a slight decline in decay class 5), N (initial sink to eventual source) and P (initially a large source followed by low rate of release). Leachate values from harvested logs were similar to those of fire origin, with the exception of N and Mn, suggesting considerable volatilization of these two nutrients during wildfire events.

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)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.181 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Same topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207