MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vegetation gradients in relation to temporal fluctuation of environmental factors in Bekanbeushi peatland, Hokkaido, Japan

2002· article· en· W2082888220 on OpenAlexaff
Taro Asada

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatSwampWater tableBogEnvironmental scienceVegetation (pathology)GroundwaterMarshHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceEcologySampling (signal processing)Physical geographyWetlandGeologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between vegetation gradients and temporal variation of groundwater table depth, groundwater pH and electrical conductivity was studied in Bekanbeushi peatland, northern Japan. These environmental factors were expressed using four statistical parameters: maximum, minimum, mean and standard deviation or coefficient of variation during the growing season. The bog–fen–swamp/marsh gradient was primarily explained by minimum, maximum and mean groundwater table depth and minimum pH. The separation between the bog and the fen by minimum pH was particularly clear. Minimum conductivity was secondarily important for explaining this vegetation gradient. The swamp–marsh gradient was explained by the standard deviation of groundwater table depth. Maximum pH and conductivity were not significant in explaining either of these gradients. This study suggests that parameters that are obtained from the consecutive measurement of environmental factors may have differing significance in explaining vegetation gradients in these peatlands, and values from a single sampling may miss important ecological information.

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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations31
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ResearchSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207