MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7042649973

Prescribed Burning to Restore Eastern White Pine Forests of La Mauricie National Park of Canada

2019· other· en· W7042649973 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionExclosureHyporeflexiaLiquationProteogenomicsWindage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eastern white pine forests of La Mauricie National Park of Canada have been severely affected by logging and forest fire suppression since the 1850s, and by the exotic white pine blister rust since the beginning of the twentieth century. These alterations have changed the ecological trajectory of eastern white pine ecosystems, which now appear hardly sustainable. Eastern white pine saplings are nearly absent, and balsam fir saplings are strong competitors for space and light. Since 1991, Parks Canada uses prescribed burning for restoring eastern white pine ecosystems. We studied seven pine stands in which prescribed burning was applied and compared them with nine unburned stands. Over 63% of balsam fir saplings were killed by prescribed burning, thus eliminating a significant part of the competition to eastern white pine seedlings. These were four times more abundant in burned than in unburned sites (21,333 vs. 5178 seedlings/ha). In the short term, the eastern white pine regeneration objectives established by Parks Canada have been achieved. Pine seedlings growth is slow, and they should be monitored regularly to ensure long-term success of this restoration programme. If necessary, it might be helpful to increase light penetration by girdling mature balsam firs or spruces.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0250.026
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.007
Open science0.0090.010
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.269 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)French-language works237,207