MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094477041 · doi:10.2980/16-2-3208

Are vegetation—environment relationships different between herbaceous and woody groundcover plants in barrens with shallow soils?

2009· article· en· W2094477041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sheryl M. Petersen, Paul B. Drewa

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundcoverVegetation (pathology)ForbHerbaceous plantEdaphicWoody plantEnvironmental sciencePine barrensQuadratPlant communityWoodlandEcologySoil waterGraminoidGeographyShrubSpecies richnessGrasslandBiologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extent to which woody vegetation exhibits more expansive community structures and different relationships with environmental variables than herbaceous plants is poorly understood in savannas and barrens worldwide, especially those with shallow soils. We explored this question in oak barrens, which are savanna habitats characterized by shallow soils, in southern Ohio, USA. Groundcover plant aerial cover and environmental data were collected using 75 randomly located 1-m2 quadrats in 3 barrens. A combination of non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) and β-flexible cluster analysis revealed 3 distinct herbaceous plant assemblages that varied in abundances of C4 and C3 graminoid species and several forbs. Herbaceous vegetation patterns were correlated with soil acidity, soil depth, plant available water, and especially soil organic matter and quadrat slope. By contrast, woody plants were more widely distributed than herbs, and woody vegetation patterns were strongly correlated only with soil organic matter, although they were weakly associated with quadrat slope and an index of tree influence. The expansion of woody plants into barrens is likely not restricted by most edaphic factors; thus, barrens are highly susceptible to woody plant encroachment that has been fostered by anthropogenic alterations to natural fire regimes (suppression, dormant season fires). We hypothesize that fires that are intended to mimic natural lightning fires during the growing season will be most effective in deterring woody plant encroachment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207