MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112689149 · doi:10.1139/b09-017

Aerial and detritus production of the cordgrass <i>Spartina densiflora</i> in a southwestern Atlantic salt marsh

2009· article· en· W2112689149 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Federico Vera, Jorge L. Gutiérrez, Pablo D. Ribeiro

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad Nacional de Mar del PlataConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasBritish Ecological Society
KeywordsBiologyDetritusTiller (botany)ProductivitySpartinaBiomass (ecology)AgronomySalt marshGrazingBotanyEcologyMarshWetland

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used a nondestructive method to estimate aerial and detritus productivity of the cordgrass Spartina densiflora Brongn. and evaluated the relative contribution of newly emerged and preexisting tillers to net aerial biomass and detritus production, the relative contribution of tiller detachment and leaf shedding to detritus production, and the incidence of crab ( Neohelice ( Chasmagnathus ) granulata (Dana, 1851)), herbivory in relation to tiller age and its implications for tiller survival. Estimates of aerial and detritus productivity varied between 706.72 (SD = 153.38) and 786.15 (SD = 162.75) g·m –2 ·year –1 and between 1054.23 (SD = 224.49) and 1223.17 (SD = 246.84) g·m –2 ·year –1 , respectively. These estimates of aerial production are far below the higher productivity estimates known for species of the genus Spartina but within the range of values obtained with nondestructive methods (i.e., 300–1500 g·m –2 ·year –1 ). Detachment of standing-dead tillers and leaf shedding contributed virtually in equal quantities to detritus production (i.e., 52% and 48% of the total detritus biomass, respectively). On the other hand, net aerial biomass production was highly dependent on tiller recruitment, with 67% of total biomass production contributed by the growth of tillers that emerged during the course of the study. However, crabs seem to graze on tillers irrespective of their age. Such nonselective crab grazing on tillers of different age together with the long tiller survival after crab grazing (often more than a year) suggests that crabs do not ostensibly affect S. densiflora production.

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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsFrench-language works237,207