MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of migratory geese on plant communities of an Alaskan salt marsh

2001· article· en· W1967674395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amy Zacheis, Jerry W. Hupp, Roger W. Ruess

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Biological Sciences
KeywordsCarexBiologyGooseSalt marshStanding cropHerbivoreBiomass (ecology)EcologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We studied the effects of lesser snow geese ( Anser caerulescens caerulescens ) and Canada geese ( Branta canadensis ) on two salt marsh plant communities in Cook Inlet, Alaska, a stopover area used during spring migration. From 1995 to 1997 we compared plant species composition and biomass on plots where geese were excluded from feeding with paired plots where foraging could occur. Foraging intensity was low (650–1930 goose‐days km −2 ) compared to other goose‐grazing systems. Canada geese fed mainly on above‐ground shoots of Triglochin maritimum, Puccinellia spp. and Carex ramenskii , whereas the majority of the snow goose diet consisted of below‐ground tissues of Plantago maritima and Triglochin maritimum . Plant communities responded differently to goose herbivory. In the sedge meadow community, where feeding was primarily on above‐ground shoots, there was no effect of grazing on the dominant species Carex ramenskii and Triglochin maritimum . In the herb meadow community, where snow geese fed on Plantago maritima roots and other below‐ground tissues, there was a difference in the relative abundance of plant species between treatments. Biomass of Plantago maritima and Potentilla egedii was lower on grazed plots compared with exclosed, whereas biomass of Carex ramenskii was greater on grazed plots. There was no effect of herbivory on total standing crop biomass in either community. The variable effect of herbivory on Carex ramenskii between communities suggests that plant neighbours and competitive interactions are important factors in a species’ response to herbivory. In addition, the type of herbivory (above‐ or below‐ground) was important in determining plant community response to herbivory. Litter accumulation was reduced in grazed areas compared with exclosed in both communities. Trampling of the previous year’s litter into the soil surface by geese incorporated more litter into soils in grazed areas. This study illustrates that even light herbivore pressure can alter plant communities and affect forage availability.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.886

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations50
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsFrench-language works237,207