An orchid colonization credit in restored calcareous grasslands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Habitat restoration comprises the re-creation of suitable environmental conditions with the intention of recolonization by certain target species. In previously abandoned calcareous grasslands, however, many characteristic plant species have been reported missing even decades after the reinstatement of traditional mowing or grazing management. Such grasslands are said to exhibit a colonization credit. This may be particularly true for orchid species, which often rely on highly specialized pollination strategies and mycorrhizal associations for completion of their life-cycle. In this study, we investigated whether restored calcareous grasslands exhibited an orchid colonization credit, whether this credit was associated with the degree of grassland fragmentation, and with particular species' life history traits. Applying the Beals index as a quantitative method to identify suitable habitats, several orchid species were indeed found missing from grasslands deemed suitable. There was no relation, however, between the extent of the colonization credit and the spatial isolation or size of the grasslands. Of all life history traits examined, only a high degree of pollinator specialization could be related to delayed colonization. This may suggest that restoring the pollinator community is an important bottleneck in calcareous grassland restoration.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".