MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124032983 · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12554

Grassland birds demonstrate delayed response to large‐scale tree removal in central North America

2015· article· en· W2124032983 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah Thompson, Todd W. Arnold, John Fieberg, Diane A. Granfors, Sara Vacek, Nick Palaia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Ecology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceDelta WaterfowlNational Fish and Wildlife FoundationUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsGrasslandVegetation (pathology)HabitatShrubAbundance (ecology)WildlifeEcologyWindbreakLitterEcological successionEnvironmental sciencePrescribed burnForestryGeographyAgroforestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Maintenance of early successional and open habitats often requires active removal of encroaching vegetation. In many cases, fire or other historically applied methods can no longer maintain or create open or early‐successional habitat. In these situations, managers must employ mechanical or chemical treatments to control vegetation and improve habitat quality for wildlife that depend on open habitats. We conducted a large‐scale study of tree removal from 2005 to 2011 on 14 grassland sites in central North America. Beginning in the autumn of 2005, shrubs, scattered trees, shelterbelts and woodlots were removed from six of fourteen study sites with cutting and burning treatments. Trees and shrubs accounted for 7–21% of pre‐treatment ground cover. We conducted vegetation and bird surveys on each site for one year before and six years after initiating tree removal treatments. Treatments effectively removed larger woody vegetation (>6 m in height), but effects of shrub removal were less consistent due to rapid regrowth. Tree removal sites also experienced reductions in grassy litter as a result of prescribed fires that were used to discourage shrub and tree regrowth. On untreated sites, abundance of all grassland birds declined throughout the study, on average declining by 62%. On tree removal sites, we estimated that grassland bird abundance dropped from 2·04 (birds per count) before treatment to a low of 0·90 in the second year after initiating treatments, but recovered in the final three years of study with a weak, but significant positive response six years after initiating treatment, with an estimated 1·42 birds per count. Waterfowl and wetland birds increased following tree removal, whereas woodland birds, particularly those that nest in cavities, declined on treated sites. Synthesis and applications . Tree removal did appear to improve habitat suitability for grassland birds, but a positive response was weak and delayed, and treatments caused short‐term habitat disturbances that significantly reduced abundance of target species. When planning large‐scale tree removal, it may be beneficial to allow undisturbed habitat in the surrounding landscape to ameliorate potential short‐term displacement of wildlife in early phases of treatment. In addition, managers should expect site recovery to require repeated treatments over multiple years.

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)0.001
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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EcologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207