MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063304694 · doi:10.4236/ajps.2011.26089

Plant Community Development in a Dryland CREP in Northeastern Oregon

2011· article· en· W2063304694 on OpenAlexaff
John D. Williams, Heidi M. Hartman, Lori M. Spencer, James O. Loiland

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Plant Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsDillon Consulting
FundersU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsNative plantRiparian zoneVegetation (pathology)TransectRevegetationPlant communityGrazingAgroforestryHabitatGeographyEnvironmental scienceAgronomyPastureThicketProductivityGrasslandForestryIntroduced speciesEcologyBiologySpecies richnessEcological succession

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Riparian areas in dryland crop regions of the Intermountain Pacific Northwest have largely been converted to cropland or pasture during the last 140 years. Some formerly cultivated floodplains have become difficult to farm; enrollment of these lands into conservation programs provides the opportunity to use them as wildlife habitat and as buffer areas near streams. Our objective was to evaluate plant community development on an USDA Conservation Reserve Enhan- cement Program site in northeastern Oregon from when the plant was planted in 1999 through 2008. The research was designed as a descriptive study. We established permanent line-transects to quantify vegetation establishment and changes in species composition through time. We collected data in 2000-2001 and 2007-2008. Vegetation cover in 2000-2001 was 100%, dominated by tall wheatgrass. Living plant material cover decreased from 98% in 2000-2001 to 33% in 2007 and 68% in 2008; dead plant residue significantly increased and tall wheatgrass cover decreased. Native species were present in similar percentages from 2000 to 2008, although there was a shift from target to nontarget species. The 1999 seeding can be judged a success because of the ground cover provided and the establishment of one target species, tall wheatgrass. However, the increased ratio of dead to living plant material and shift to non-target annual weed species suggests that more active management (i.e., fire, grazing, or mowing) of the tall wheatgrass stand is needed to maintain its productivity and/or a healthy mix of multiple species.

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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Plant SciencesSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207