The Competitive Response of Panicum virgatum Cultivars to Non-Native Invasive Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is important to use the most appropriate plant cultivar in restoration or biofuel trials especially when plantings are likely to be invaded by undesirable species. In this study, the competitive response of two lowland and three upland cultivars of the dominant C4 grass Panicum virgatum to three invasive species (Bromus inermis, Schedonorus phoenix, and Poa pratensis) was tested using a simple pair-wise greenhouse experiment. Response variables (height, number of leaves, tiller density, and biomass of P. virgatum) and resources (soil moisture and light intensity) were measured over a seven-month period. Performance of the different P. virgatum cultivars were differentially reduced by the three invasive species, especially the performance of the Kanlow (lowland) and Blackwell (upland) cultivars. Low soil moisture reduced the performance of P. virgatum in the presence of only one invasive (Bromus inermis) irrespective of cultivar source. Root, shoot, and total biomass depended on cultivar and did not show an interaction with invasive species identity. The results of this greenhouse study suggest that the P. virgatum cultivars differentially responded to the invasive species and that the cultivar used should be considered carefully in planning prairie restorations or biofuel trials in the context of likely invasive species.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".