MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1598748049 · doi:10.1111/grs.12098

Evaluating the impacts of nearly 30 years of conservation on grassland ecosystem using Landsat <scp>TM</scp> images

2015· article· en· W1598748049 on OpenAlexafffund
Dandan Xu, Xulin Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueGrassland Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship CouncilUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsGrasslandGrazingBiodiversityEnvironmental scienceOvergrazingGrassland degradationGrassland ecosystemEcosystemLitterBiomass (ecology)AgroforestryEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When grassland degradation became a global issue because of overgrazing and other human activities, grassland managers implemented different management methods in an attempt to restore grassland ecosystems (e.g. conservation actions). Few studies have investigated the impacts of conservation actions (removing large grazers and conserving biodiversity) on grassland ecosystems, therefore, this study aims to evaluate the impacts of conservation actions and to measure the time lag of the significant influences of grassland conservations on mixed grasslands that were assessed by five different biophysical parameters (biodiversity, soil organic matter, fresh biomass, litter cover and green cover). Instead of measuring the biophysical parameters from field data and remotely sensed images, the methodology of this study focused on the difference in biophysical parameters between the ecological comparison sites (grazing sites and conserved sites), which enhance the impacts of grassland conservation on grasslands comparing to grazing management. The results show that: (i) biodiversity in conserved grasslands increased gradually in the first 3–5 years, decreased gradually over the next 4 or 5 years, and then stabilized after that; (ii) soil organic matter increased and reached its maximum value within 7–9 years of conservation and then remained at this level, while litter accumulated the maximum level one year later than soil organic matter; (iii) soil organic matter is the primary factor of biodiversity in the grasslands with low litter accumulation, while high‐density litter layers are the primary cause of decreases in biodiversity; (iv) fresh biomass decreased over a period of 7–10 years under conservation and remained nearly unchanged after that; (v) green vegetation fraction was also increased by conservation action in about 6–7 years. The result of this study provides the fundamental information for implementing and adjusting grassland management policies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.249 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGrassland ScienceSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207