Short-term Effects of Forest Soil Compaction and Site Organic Matter Removal on Mineralizable Soil Nitrogen in Central British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mineralizable nitrogen (min-N) often correlates well with plant-available nitrogen (N) in soils, and might serve as a useful indicator of whether soils are detrimentally affected by timber harvesting practices. We examined how min-N responded to soil compaction and site organic matter removal after 1 and 5 years on three sites in central British Columbia. Mineral soil min-N was found to change after disturbance, increasing on some plots after 5 years by as much as 20 mg kg-1. Some of the lowest min-N concentrations were found after forest floor removal, but inconsistent responses across compaction treatments and sites made it difficult to generalize on the overall effects of soil disturbance. Forest floor min-N increased across all plots in the first years after tree harvest, but returned to pre-harvest levels by year 5, with no effects detected from compaction or wholetree harvest. The net change in mineral soil min-N was significantly correlated to foliar N of white spruce, but not lodgepole pine. Although levels of min-N were able to demonstrate some differences in soil productivity, its usefulness as a management tool would require a better understanding of mechanisms causing changes in min-N after disturbance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".