MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021443650 · doi:10.1139/b00-159

Land cover change in eastern Kansas: litter dynamics of closed-canopy eastern redcedar forests in tallgrass prairie

2001· article· en· W2021443650 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark D. Norris, John M. Blair, Loretta C. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of KansasNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsLitterAndropogonGrasslandPlant litterEnvironmental scienceUnderstoryEcologyAgronomyCanopyEcosystemBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Great Plains region, eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana L.) abundance has increased dramatically in areas historically occupied by tallgrass prairie. This shift in dominant vegetation is likely to be accompanied by changes in ecosystem structure and function, including quantity, quality, and location (above- vs. below-ground) of litter inputs and subsequent effects on decomposition dynamics. The purpose of this study was to quantify and compare patterns of litterfall and decomposition in mature redcedar forests and adjacent prairie. Annual redcedar litterfall was 500 g·m -2 ·year -1 , a large increase in foliar litter inputs compared with annually burned grassland (52 g·m -2 ·year -1 ). Using a reciprocal transplant decomposition study with four substrates, redcedar leaves and roots, and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman) foliage and roots, we found marginal habitat effects, but greater differences between species, presumably owing to litter quality (including both C:N and lignin content). Decay rates were significantly higher in the prairie relative to the forest for each substrate. Additionally, within any particular habitat, grass litter had significantly faster decay rates than forest litter. These results suggest a shift in patterns of litter input and decomposition processes with afforestation of tallgrass prairie, which may result in long-term changes in C sequestration and storage.Key words: litter dynamics, eastern redcedar (Juniperus virginiana), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), decomposition, tallgrass prairie, nitrogen immobilization.

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 score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations51
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207