Response of <i>Gaultheria shallon</i> and <i>Epilobium angustifolium</i> to large additions of nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was established in coastal British Columbia to determine if repeated nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) fertilization negatively influences the reestablishment of salal (Gaultheria shallon Pursh) on cleared and burned cedarhemlock (Thuja plicata Donn ex D. Don Tsuga heterophylla (Raf.) Sarg.) forests. Fertilizers were applied for 3 years, and the biomass of ground vegetation and conifer seedling survival and growth were measured. Salal biomass decreased with high levels of N application (1000 kg N/ha), but not when 400 kg P/ha was added with 1000 kg N/ha. The addition of 500 kg N/ha, with or without P, stimulated salal growth. The biomass of fireweed (Epilobium angusti folium L.) increased with the addition of N + P but not with N alone. In the high N and N + P treatments, conifer seedling survival and heights were reduced. These results confirm earlier reports that salal responds negatively to high N applications and that this negative response can be alleviated with simultaneous additions of P. The response of fireweed to N + P, but not to N alone, suggests that the abundance of this species is more indicative of P than N 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".