Isolating the role of soil resources, defoliation, and interspecific competition on early establishment of the late successional bunchgrass<i>Festuca campestris</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Native grasslands are valued for biodiversity and supporting dormant season grazing, but are prone to invasion. In western Canada, revegetation ofFestuca campestrisgrasslands may be hindered byPoa pratensis, an invasive grass. To determine the competitive interaction of these species during establishment, two greenhouse experiments were conducted whereF. campestrisseedlings were planted in monocultures or mixtures withP. pratensis. The first experiment used equal‐aged (3‐month old) seedlings of both species, while the second experiment used unequal‐aged seedlings (4‐month‐oldF. campestrisand 2‐month‐oldP. pratensis). Seedling performance was measured in response to manipulations of water and nitrogen, defoliation, and plant neighbor. While water and nitrogen reduced the biomass and vegetative reproduction (tillering) ofF. campestris, exposure toP. pratensismost strongly limited the growth ofF. campestrisseedlings regardless of other treatments. More frequent and consistent decreases inF. campestrisdue toP. pratensiswere observed in olderF. campestrisseedlings than younger seedlings. Defoliation also reduced the growth ofF. campestris, and the added presence ofP. pratensisduring defoliation further enhanced these reductions in younger, equal‐aged bunchgrass seedlings. Overall, these results suggest that when restoring nativeF. campestrisgrasslands, early establishment may be improved by reducing the negative impacts ofP. pratensis, and avoiding severe defoliation.
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 | 0.000 | 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".