MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estudo fitossociológico de uma comunidade vegetal sobre canga como subsídio para a reabilitação de áreas mineradas no quadrilátero ferrífero, MG

2008· article· pt· W1999152037 on OpenAlexaff
Cláudia Maria Jacobi, Flávio Fonseca do Carmo, Regina de Castro Vincent

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Árvore · 2008
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Management and Crop Yield
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyOrchidaceaeAsteraceaeCyperaceaeBotanyPoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O objetivo deste trabalho foi caracterizar a estrutura e composição de um campo rupestre sobre canga para servir de base a estudos sobre reabilitação de áreas degradadas pela mineração de ferro. Estudou-se uma canga no Parque Estadual da Serra do Rola-Moça, MG. Em 30 parcelas de 2 m², foram amostrados 2.151 indivíduos pertencentes a 32 espécies e 16 famílias, com diversidade de 2,45 nats/ind. A altura média foi de 15,8 ± 16,3 cm, com 80% dos indivíduos menores do que 25 cm. As famílias mais importantes foram Orchidaceae, Poaceae e Cyperaceae, e as espécies com maior valor de importância foram Andropogon ingratus (Poaceae), Lychnophora pinaster (Asteraceae), Bulbostylis fimbriata (Cyperaceae), Sophronitis caulescens (Orchidaceae) e Sebastiania glandulosa (Euphorbiaceae). Sugere-se que essas espécies mais importantes, aquelas com crescimento clonal como gramíneas, ciperáceas e orquídeas epilíticas, as facilitadoras como Stachytarpheta glabra e Mimosa calodendron e espécies tolerantes a metais pesados como Vellozia spp. sejam candidatas prioritárias em programas de recuperação de áreas degradadas por mineração de ferro.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations76
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista ÁrvoreSame topicSoil Management and Crop YieldFrench-language works237,207