Seasonal and annual variability in the quality of important forage plants on Banks Island, Canadian High Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. In vitro acid‐pepsin digestibility (IVDMD), crude protein (CP), fibre, lignin, and energy content were measured for a variety of forage plants collected annually from Banks Island over five summers and three winters from 1993–1998. Summer samples were collected during mid‐June (start of growing season), mid‐July (peak of growing season), and mid‐late August (senescence). Winter samples were collected in early (November), mid‐ (February), and late‐ (April/May) winter. Samples, collected in areas of both high and low muskox density, included Carex aquatilis, unidentified Carex, Salixarctica, Dryasintegrifolia, Cassiope tetragona, Saxifraga spp., Astragalus spp., Oxytropis spp., lichen, and grass. Seasonal dynamics in forage quality during the growing season were similar to those reported elsewhere in the arctic and high arctic and were consistent across years. However, there were significant year effects in lignin, fibre, and energy content of forages and the crude protein (CP) content of C. aquatilis in winter, indicating annual differences in the quality of forage available to herbivores. The quality of forages on Banks Island was similar between areas subjected to different densities of muskox (ca. 1.6–1.9 versus 0.3 ‐ 0.4/km2) implying that quality was not affected by these grazing intensities. The Banks Island high arctic ecosystem supports an abundance of herbivores. It has been hypothesized that this is because forage quality and/or quantity are superior on Banks Island than elsewhere in the high arctic. Our results regarding forage quality are equivocal. Although the maximum CP content of forages from Banks Island was generally higher than reported elsewhere in the arctic and high arctic, CP content reported elsewhere fell within the interannual range reported from Banks Island. Fibre and energy content of forages from Banks Island were similar to slightly lower than elsewhere in the arctic and high arctic. Such comparisons must be considered in light of the interannual variability in quality we report.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".