MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030715879 · doi:10.4141/cjss07045

Surface runoff response of native and introduced grasses under simulated rainfall in southern Alberta

2008· article· en· W2030715879 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPasture and Agricultural Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaNSW Department of Primary IndustriesAustralian Academy of Science
KeywordsAgronomyPerennial plantAgropyron cristatumSurface runoffPastureEnvironmental scienceGrasslandAgropyronRangelandGrazingBouteloua gracilisElymusBiologyPoaceaeEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduced perennial grass-based pastures (e.g., crested wheatgrass, Agropyron cristatum, and Russian wildrye, Elymus junceus) are promoted as desirable alternatives to natural grasslands (Stipa-Bouteloua-Agropyron spp.) for livestock production systems on the mixed-grass prairie of Alberta. A study was conducted on plots established in 1993 to examine the surface runoff response from natural grasslands, introduced grasses and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under simulated rainfall in response to pasture and soil characteristics. The grass plots were never grazed, but herbage growth was harvested on an annual basis, while wheat was seeded each year following tillage. Both wheat and crested wheatgrass were less able to retain applied water; with low initial abstraction (5.1–5.7mm), runoff peaked earlier (14–26 min) and with higher intensity (65.1–68.8mm h -1 ) giving larger values of the rising limb factor (0.61–1.10). Two grasslands dominated by native species showed more desirable runoff characteristics; with high initial abstraction (9.6–13.3mm), runoff peaked later (32–54 min) and with lower intensity (32.7–45.8mm h -1 ) giving smaller values of the rising limb factor (0.13–0.35). Russian wildrye had an intermediary response. A linear model identified that to reduce the rising limb factor and amount of runoff generated after 30 min, the antecedent conditions of ground cover (%), litter dry matter (DM) and dead herbage DM were singularly important variables and the native grasslands had significantly higher levels of these. Importantly, fine and medium litter fragments of natural grasslands had higher water-holding capacity (>3.0 g g -1 ) compared with litter of the introduced species (~2.5 g g -1 ). However, when variables were considered in combination runoff decreased with higher ground cover and increased with higher soil water content. Levels of total N and total P in surface runoff were generally low (< 2 mg N L -1 , < 1 mg P L -1 ), but ammonium and reactive P export from the native species was greater than for the introduced species. Suspended sediment yield did not differ among the grassland treatments, but was significantly higher for wheat. Less runoff was generated on grasslands that had high amounts of litter, dead standing herbage and ground cover. Increasing the amount of litter in pastures by using grazing management may decrease the runoff response and so avoid loss of surface water and soil nutrients. Key words: Ground cover, litter, water quality, native grasses, nutrients

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.839

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.192 · 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