Classification of plant communities in Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve and Haida Heritage Site
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Plant communities were classified and described for Gwaii Haanas National Park Reserve and Haida Heritage Site located on the Queen Charlotte Islands in British Columbia, Canada. Existing vegetation and environment data were compiled from various sources and assessed for their compatibility as an integrated database. The combined data set was subjected to floristic and physiognomic - floristic methods for vegetation classification using TWINSPAN. The results of each were assessed using multiple response permutation procedures (MRPP) and vegetation tabular analysis (VTAB) to determine which method was superior, based on the homogeneity of individual vegetation units and the presence of meaningful diagnostic species in each. Gradient analysis (Cannonical Correspondence Analysis) was also utilised in conjunction with classification results to explore vegetation - environment relationships. Each association was described individually and in a landscape context. Data considered for analysis in this study were deemed to be acceptable for amalgamation. A bias was detected in sampling distribution overall, favouring upland forests. Species identification effort varied between data sets, particularly with respect to the detection of bryophytes and graminoids. The physiognomic - floristic approach was determined to be moderately superior. This classification resulted in a hierarchical structure with 9 alliances, 20 associations and 12 subassociations. These associations range in an elevational gradient from estuarine meadows and rocky shoreline communities through upland forests and wetlands to subalpine parkland. Subalpine and alpine communities are limited in the study area and were poorly represented in the data. Most communities appear simplified, homogenous and poorly defined, in floristic composition. This has been ascribed to browsing pressure by introduced deer. This effect is particularly evident in the upland forest communities. Recommendations are made for future expansion of classification work in the protected area. Assessment of plant association distribution and abundance for conservation purposes is desirable but not possible due to a lack of spatial accuracy and poor correlation between plant associations and environmental attributes. Additional sampling which takes into consideration geographic stratification and positional accuracy will allow for more rigorous spatial analysis in the future.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».