MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

GRAZING AND SUBSTRATE INTERACT TO AFFECT NATIVE VS. EXOTIC DIVERSITY IN ROADSIDE GRASSLANDS

2001· article· en· W2160405051 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hugh D. Safford, Susan Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRyerson University
KeywordsGrazingEcologyDiversity (politics)Affect (linguistics)Substrate (aquarium)GrasslandIntroduced speciesBiologyGeographyCommunicationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compared the native and exotic species composition of ungrazed roadside verges with that of adjacent grazed interiors in the grasslands of California's inner northern coast range (Napa and Lake Counties). We sampled 72 pairs of verge and interior quadrats at five sites representative of the region's grasslands, on both fertile (loam) and infertile (serpentine) soils, avoiding all obvious forms of roadside physical disturbance. We found that, on serpentine soils, ungrazed verges had a higher proportion of exotic species than grazed interiors; on nonserpentine soils, the reverse was true. Within serpentine soils, native species were more prevalent in quadrats with lower biomass; within nonserpentine, natives were more prevalent in quadrats receiving less radiation. Overall, the total species diversity was higher in grazed interiors than on ungrazed verges, regardless of the fertility of the substrate. Our results indicate that the ecological role of roadside verges depends on the interactive effects of community composition and history, environmental gradients, and land use practices that characterize a region.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations61
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207