MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150729568 · doi:10.1139/b05-054

Truffle abundance in riparian and upland mixed-conifer forest of California's southern Sierra Nevada

2005· article· en· W2150729568 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marc D. Meyer, Malcolm P. North

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceJoint Fire Science Program
KeywordsRiparian zoneTruffleSpecies richnessRiparian forestAbundance (ecology)EcologyHabitatCoarse woody debrisGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compared the abundance, diversity, and composition of truffles in riparian and upland areas within a mixed-conifer forest of the Sierra Nevada of California. We sampled for truffles in a single watershed over two seasons (spring and summer) and 4 years to determine whether truffles were more abundant and diverse in riparian than upland sites in old-growth, mixed-conifer forest. Truffle frequency, biomass, and species richness were greater in riparian sites than in upland sites in both spring and summer samples. Species composition of truffles also was different between sites, with nine and one species found exclusively in riparian and upland sites, respectively. Distance between the center of truffle plots to logs and trees was lower and soil moisture was greater in riparian sites compared with upland sites, suggesting that log density, tree proximity, and soil moisture may influence truffle production in these habitats. Our study underscores the importance of riparian areas for truffles, a primary food source for northern flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus) in the Sierra Nevada of California.Key words: truffles, riparian, Sierra Nevada.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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.

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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207