MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080305326 · doi:10.2134/agronj2010.0360

Native Perennial Grassland Species for Bioenergy: Establishment and Biomass Productivity

2011· article· en· W2080305326 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Margaret E. Mangan, Craig C. Sheaffer, Donald L. Wyse, Nancy Ehlke, Peter B. Reich

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBioenergy crop production and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecies richnessPolycultureBiologyMonocultureBiomass (ecology)AgronomyPerennial plantSpecies diversityProductivityPanicum virgatumBioenergyEcologyBiofuel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proposed perennial bioenergy cropping systems include both native grass monocultures and polycultures of grasses and forbs. We determined the effect of species richness and composition on establishment and initial biomass production of native plant polycultures. Twelve treatments with varying levels of species richness (1–24 species) were established. Establishment success and yield varied over eight locations. The number of species established in polyculture increased linearly as the number of species seeded increased. Average biomass yield ranged from 1.2 to 6.0 Mg ha −1 with the highest yielding treatments being grass monocultures or an eight species grass–legume mixture. An increase in species richness from one to eight species increased yield an average of 28%, but increasing species richness from 8 to 12 or 24 species had no yield advantage at most locations. Early successional species, Canada milkvetch ( Astragalus canadensis L.) and Maximilian sunflower ( Helianthus maximilian Schrad.), were dominant in mixtures and contributed a majority of the biomass to the yield. Even in high diversity plots, biomass was from only a few plant species with a single species dominating the mixture. Our results suggest that selected low diversity mixtures (one to five species) likely offer the best combination of species establishment and high yield during stand establishment. However, we expect that early successional species that were dominant during the establishment phase of our experiment will contribute less biomass as stands mature and later successional species will become dominant and provide greater biomass.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations48
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicBioenergy crop production and managementFrench-language works237,207