Tree growth on disturbed calcareous forest soils in southeastern British Columbia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calcareous soils represent up to one third of the forest land base in southeastern British Columbia (B.C.). Throughout B.C., calcareous soils occupy about 10 % of the land base. Calcareous soils contain sufficient free lime (calcium carbonate or magnesium carbonate) to effervesce when treated with 10 % hydrochloric acid. These soils have high pH, are often finer textured, and occur in B.C. because of semi-arid conditions and/or limestone derived soil parent material. The B.C. Ministry of Forests (B.C.MoF) and Canadian Forest Service (CFS) have studied tree growth on disturbed calcareous soils for over 25 years. Early B.C.MoF studies on harvesting and site preparation disturbance, and CFS studies on skidroad disturbance, created an awareness of the sensitivity of these soils. Soil disturbance guidelines that recognize this sensitivity were developed during the 1980s and incorporated in the 1995 Forest Practices Code of B.C. Act. Subsequently, an integrated study on calcareous soils has been developed that incorporates existing and new research sites. The largest new installation is a Long-Term Soil Productivity study (LTSP) that includes rehabilitation treatments and “miniplots ” to monitor smaller disturbances, such as displacement and exposure of calcareous subsoils. Mirroring research trials on non-calcareous soils, the objectives of the studies are to test and verify policy aimed at ensuring sustainable forest development. Results to date indicate that trees of some species, such as white spruce (Picea glauca), may grow 30 % less on undisturbed calcareous soils.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".