MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048937375 · doi:10.1002/iroh.200510954

A Comparative Study of Leaf Breakdown of Three Native Tree Species in a Slowly‐Flowing Headwater Stream in the Colombian Andes

2007· article· en· W2048937375 on OpenAlexaff
Julian Chará, Donald J. Baird, Trevor C. Telfer, Lina Paola Giraldo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Hydrobiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvertebratePlant litterLitterFaunaBiomass (ecology)BotanyBiologyEcologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The dynamics of leaf breakdown in a headwater Colombian stream were evaluated for the native tree species Myrsine guianensis, Cupania latifolia and Nectandra lineatifolia using coarse and fine mesh litter bags. Ten bags of each species (five of each mesh size) were retrieved from the stream at 1, 8, 15, 30, 60 and 120 days. k values ranged from 0.0008 to 0.0058 day–1 and density of macroinvertebrates from 35 to 55 individuals per leaf bag, peaking at day 8. Myrsine guianensis degraded more rapidly than the other species for both coarse and fine mesh bags. This species and Nectandra lineatifolia presented differences in k values between coarse and fine mesh bags, suggesting that macroinvertebrates influenced the decay rate. Despite the low densities of macroinvertebrates found, shredders represented 12.7% of individuals and 50 to 68% of the invertebrate biomass in bags, indicating that this functional feeding group was an important component of fauna associated with litter breakdown in this first order tropical stream. (© 2007 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

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)0.000
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations30
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of HydrobiologySame topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFrench-language works237,207