Invertebrate predation of postdispersal seeds and juvenile seedlings of black spruce (<i>Picea mariana</i>) in the boreal forest of eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used an extensive vertebrate exclosure experiment to evaluate black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) B.S.P.) postdispersal seed and seedling predation by invertebrates in three boreal habitats of Eastern Canada: recent burn, sprucemoss, and lichen woodland. Between 9% and 19% of seeds were eaten by invertebrates. Seed predation was higher in recent burns than in sprucemoss and lichen woodlands. Abundance and diversity of potential invertebrate seed consumers sampled in pitfall traps also varied among habitat types. Among the invertebrate seed consumers sampled, Myrmica spp. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and Pterostichus adstrictus (Eschscholtz, 1823) (Coleoptera: Carabidae) were the most numerous; Formica spp. (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) and Pterostichus punctatissimus (Randall, 1838) (Coleoptera: Carabidae) were also present. Between 2% and 12% of juvenile black spruce seedlings were eaten by invertebrates. The most important seedling consumers were slugs (molluscs). Invertebrate predation of seeds and seedlings was highest (19% and 12%) in recent burns, indicating that invertebrate predation may significantly influence black spruce regeneration in these sites.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".