Distribution and habitat niches of 37 peatland Cyperaceae species across a broad geographic range in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence and absence of 37 Cyperaceae species found on 498 peatlands across Canada were examined along surface water chemistry, shade, height above the water table, and climatic gradients. A canonical correspondence analysis of the species distribution along the environmental gradients indicated that surface water chemistry and climate were highly correlated with the first and second axes and were the two most important gradients distinguishing among groups. The climatic gradient was further subdivided into western oceanic continental and eastern oceanic continental gradients. Height above the water table and shade were correlated to the third canonical correspondence analysis axis and were of secondary importance in explaining species distributions. A TWINSPAN analysis of the species separated them into eight groups: (1) widespread, obligate rich fen, wet, shade-tolerant species; (2) widespread rich fen preferential species; (3) continental and eastern oceanic, rich fen preferential, wet, shade-intolerant species; (4) widespread fen, wet, shade-intolerant species; (5) widespread bog or fen, shade-tolerant species; (6) widespread subcontinental and oceanic, bog or fen, shade-intolerant species; (7) eastern subcontinental and oceanic, poor fen preferential species; (8) western oceanic, bog and poor fen preferential, shade-intolerant species. Response surfaces were generated by quantifying the frequency of occurrence of representative species in each group along pH and height above the water table, shade and mean annual temperature, and mean annual total precipitation gradients. Frequency of occurrence values for several of the rarer species indicated that they were not limited by the number of suitable habitats analyzed in this study but by other factors such as competition, failure to establish, or dispersal. This study emphasizes the importance of habitat and climate in determining the local and regional diversity and distribution of the most common Cyperaceae on peatlands in Canada.Key words: sedges, Carex, peat lands, response surfaces, climate, water chemistry.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".