MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1909923602 · doi:10.1139/b11-109

Effects of recreational rock climbing and environmental variation on a sandstone cliff-face lichen community

2012· article· en· W1909923602 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Matthew D. Adams, Kamil Zaniewski

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityLakehead University
FundersLakehead University
KeywordsCliffClimbingDetrended correspondence analysisLichenSpecies richnessGeologyCanonical correspondence analysisOutcropEcologyPhysical geographyGeographyBiologyGeomorphologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lichen community composition was evaluated for both lichen cover and richness on a cliff face commonly used for recreational rock climbing. The sandstone outcrop is located on the Sibley Peninsula, which extends from the north shore of Lake Superior. One-hundred and twenty plots were examined. Each plot was 1 m 2 in size, with 60 plots located on unclimbed cliff sections and 60 more located where recreational rock climbing regularly occurs. Lichen richness and cover were significantly lower on the rock climbing sections compared with unclimbed sections. Linear regression models indicated significant relationships with cover and richness to environmental response variables and climbing treatment. Detrended correspondence analysis indicated a separation of lichen community groups on this cliff, and major separations occurred between plots in each climbing treatment. Canonical correspondence analysis indicated a significant amount of community group variation between climbed and unclimbed locations related to climbing treatment and aspect of the plots. Climbing is found to have an impact on this sandstone cliff-face lichen community.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207