Facilitation of<i>Leymus mollis</i>by<i>Honckenya peploides</i>on coastal dunes in subarctic Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant recruitment in the very first stages of primary succession is limited by seed availability and harsh abiotic conditions. Facilitation, the positive effect of an earlier successional species on a later successional one, is often significant during primary succession and may result from the trapping of seeds and (or) the improvement of seed germination, seedling emergence, establishment, growth, and survival. We examined the effect of mature Honckenya peploides (L.) Ehrh. (Caryophyllaceae) plants on Leymus mollis Trin. (Poaceae) seedling recruitment on a coastal dune in subarctic Quebec, Canada. Facilitative effects of H. peploides on L. mollis may be critical because the latter species is a key element in the dynamics of the coastal dunes at high latitudes in eastern Canada. Honckenya peploides forms small mounds on the upper beach (the embryo dunes) that are typically distinct from the foredune. Leymus mollis progression towards the upper beach occurs through clonal growth, but seedling recruitment is also significant and contributes to the population genetic diversity. We determined L. mollis seedling emergence and growth and estimated various abiotic variables in two habitats on the upper beach: the embryo dunes and the bare, flat areas beside embryo dunes. Sand accumulation and substrate salinity were higher on the embryo dunes than beside them. Leymus mollis seedling emergence was more important on embryo dunes, although seedling growth was lower there. Our results suggest that the embryo dunes formed by H. peploides facilitate L. mollis recruitment possibly by trapping seeds and improving seed germination and seedling emergence.Key words: coastal dunes, facilitation, Honckenya peploides, interspecific interactions, Leymus mollis, sand burial.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".