MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052067501 · doi:10.1139/f04-145

Slow initial decomposition and fungal colonization of pine branches in a nutrient-rich lowland stream

2004· article· en· W2052067501 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bernd Spänhoff, Mark O. Gessner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutrientBark (sound)ColonizationErgosterolLeaching (pedology)DecompositionBotanyBiomass (ecology)Dry weightChemistryBiologyPinus <genus>HorticultureEnvironmental chemistryEcologySoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mass loss, fungal colonization, and chemical changes of submerged pine (Pinus sylvestris) branches were monitored in a nutrient-rich lowland stream. Branches retrieved from the stream were analyzed for water-soluble substances to assess mass loss by leaching. Concentrations of substances soluble in hot 1% NaOH were determined in order to detect changes in wood-tissue structure indicating microbial degradative activity, and fungal colonization was estimated as ergosterol concentration. Decomposition of the pine branches was slow, with a mean mass loss of 8.3% within 13 months and an overall decay coefficient, k, of 0.074·year–1. Concentrations of water-soluble substances in wood decreased from 2.8% to 1.7% after 5 weeks and in bark from 5.6% to 3.8% within 2 weeks. No further losses were noted, nor were significant changes observed in concentrations of substances soluble in hot dilute NaOH. Fungal biomass in bark increased within the first 5 weeks (14–69 µg ergosterol·g–1dry mass) but was invariably low in wood. These results indicate that decomposition of intact fully corticated pine branchwood in streams proceeds very slowly, with little fungal colonization and no notable changes in wood structure occurring after more than a year even when dissolved nutrients in stream water are readily available.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations17
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207