The effect of tissue complexity and sward height on the functional response of Wood Bison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract 1. Little is known about the interplay between tissue complexity and tissue selection and its effect on the ungulate functional response. Effects of sward height and of bison tissue selectivity on the functional response of bison Bison bison athabascae Rhoads were examined. 2. The height of stem present in a sward was varied. Grazing depth of bison was negatively related to height of stem, and this relationship was more pronounced in tall swards. Bison preferred leaf to stem tissue at all sward heights, though preference of leaf was positively related to sward height. 3. While controlling for selectivity, a factorial design was used effectively to uncouple sward height from sward biomass. Intake rates and bite sizes obtained on simple swards were used to quantify functional responses. Without tissue selection, sward height had no effect on the functional response. Sward biomass explained 90% of the variation in intake rates. 4. Rates of bison food intake on complex swards with both stem and leaf tissue were significantly depressed at low sward biomass, relative to those obtained on simpler leaf‐only swards. Thus, sward tissue composition is a crucial covariate for characterizing intake rates of grazing ungulates.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".