Logging impacts on forest carabid assemblages in Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We hypothesized that small-area logging (<1 ha) would greatly affect microhabitats of carabid beetles. To test this hypothesis, we studied the carabid assemblages at Kamigamo Experimental Station, Kyoto, Japan, from June 1999 to May 2001. From the analysis of the number of individuals and niche breadth, the numbers of large carnivores (Carabus dehanii Chaudoir, Carabus maiyasanus Bates, and Carabus yaconinus Bates) and large insectivores (Chlaenius posticalis Motschulsky and Haplochlaenius costiger (Chaudoir)) decreased because of logging, whereas the small carabids, Synuchus arcuaticollis (Motschulsky) and Synuchus cycloderus (Bates), may not have been negatively influenced by logging. The mass of the FH layer significantly affected the total number of Pterostichus latemarginatus (Straneo) and marginally affected the number of S. cycloderus. However, soil water content (%) and the mass of the L layer did not affect the total number of individuals in any species. The results of this study imply that (1) the richness of the FH layer and vegetation, that is, the potential food abundance and habitat richness, is involved in determining species richness and the density of the carabid assemblages and (2) even small-area logging may have a negative impact on the density of the large predatory carabids, which are sensitive indicators of forest disturbance.
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".