Comparison of the vegetation and seedbanks of soybean fields, adjacent boundaries, and hedgerows in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patterns of plant assemblages in habitats located within agroecosystems are poorly understood. A study of the seedbank and standing vegetation in 10 soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] fields, their adjacent boundaries, and adjoining woody hedgerows was undertaken in Ontario. The objective was to examine the composition of plants of conservation value and weedy species in these habitats. The seedbank of each habitat was determined from soil cores in quadrats located at regular intervals along transects, using the seedling emergence method in the greenhouse. The vegetation was surveyed in plots adjacent to the seedbank sampling areas. There was no significant difference in total species richness of vegetation or the seedbank among habitat types. However, there was a marked difference in species composition. In the seedbank, no difference in weed species richness among habitats was observed. In vegetation, however, fields harboured significantly more weedy species than adjacent boundaries and hedgerows. The dissimilarity between the seedbank and the vegetation was confirmed in detrended correspondence analyses, which showed that hedgerow vegetation, and to a lesser extent boundary vegetation, differed from field vegetation and all the habitats of the seedbank. The analysis of soil properties indicated that organic matter and nutrient levels were often higher in hedgerows than in fields. It can be concluded that hedgerows are valuable habitats for plant diversity and that weed species represent a minor component of their overall vegetation composition. Key words: Agroecosystems, field boundaries, hedgerows, soil seedbank, vegetation composition
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".