Effect of the invasive common reed on the abundance, richness and diversity of birds in freshwater marshes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Eurasian genotype of common reed P hragmites australis subsp. australis is rapidly invading freshwater marshes in N orth A merica. Several bird species depend upon particular plant assemblages for feeding and reproduction and could be adversely affected by the expansion of this invader. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of common reed on the abundance, richness, diversity and site occupancy of bird assemblages in freshwater marshes recently invaded by the plant (southern Q uebec, C anada). We conducted fixed‐distance point counts for songbirds (passerines and rails) and visual surveys for waterbirds (ducks, geese and waders) during two nesting seasons (2009 and 2010). There were major structural differences between common reed stands and marsh vegetation assemblages dominated by other plant species (bulrushes, cattails, sedges). However, there was a little difference in abundance, richness, diversity and site occupancy for songbirds. Marsh wren C istothorus palustris , a wetland specialist, was the only nesting bird that preferred a native plant (cattail) over common reed, probably because common reed stands have low plant diversity and few appropriate nest materials. No major differences were observed in the abundance of waterbirds between invaded and non‐invaded marshes. For most bird species, the water depth of the marsh had more influence on the abundance of individuals and on site occupancy than the composition of the plant assemblage. Common reed stands can therefore be used by generalist and specialist marsh passerines as feeding and reproduction sites. However, it is possible that in southern Q uebec, the number and extent of common reed populations have not yet reached a threshold beyond which adverse effects of the invader on avian species could be significant. This study adds to a growing body of evidence showing that the relationship between invasive plants and birds is not straightforward.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".