MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2023491849 · doi:10.1139/f01-056

Response of the Cache Creek macroinvertebrates during the first 10 years following disturbance by the 1988 Yellowstone wildfires

2001· article· en· W2023491849 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
G. Wayne Minshall, Todd V. Royer, Christopher T. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChironomidaeBenthic zoneSTREAMSSpecies richnessEnvironmental scienceEcologyHydrology (agriculture)Biomass (ecology)InvertebrateDrainage basinDisturbance (geology)MayflyRiver ecosystemAbundance (ecology)HabitatGeographyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluated the effects of disturbance on stream benthic macroinvertebrates at the ecological scales of time, stream size, and burn extent in six segments of Cache Creek over the first 10 postfire years. Postfire changes in macroinvertebrate taxa richness, density, and dominant taxa in the burn streams were significantly different from those in the reference stream. Chironomidae and Baetis typically comprised 40–60% of the macroinvertebrate assemblages of burned streams but only 15–18% of the assemblage in the reference site. Coefficients of variation for the 10-year period indicated that richness, density, biomass, and Baetis abundance were more variable (1.2–3.5 times higher) in the burn streams than in the reference stream and that variability in Chironomidae abundance in burn sites increased with stream size. Fire effects were not attenuated progressively with increasing stream size, probably because the proportion of the catchment burned did not decrease. However, similar-sized streams in which 68–71% of their catchments burned were more severely disturbed than those in which only 39–47% burned. Long-term effects on the macroinvertebrate community were due largely to the loss of terrestrial vegetation and increased runoff, which caused severe alterations in stream channel conditions and large-scale bedload movement.

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations75
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→