The soil seed bank of a montane meadow: consequences of conifer encroachment and implications for restoration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined changes in the soil seed bank associated with conifer encroachment of montane meadows in the western Cascade Range of Oregon. We asked whether, and over what period of time, meadow species maintain viable seeds in the soil, and by implication, whether the seed bank can contribute to restoration if conifers are removed. Seed bank composition, ground vegetation, and forest age structure were quantified for 209 samples representing a chronosequence of open meadow, young forest (<75 years), and old forest (95 to >200 years). The seed bank was substantial (44 taxa and 2332 germinants/m 2 ), but dominated by native ruderals (16 species comprising 71% of germinants). Greater than 70% of meadow species were absent from the seed bank. Thirteen meadow species accounted for 21% of all germinants, but most of these were the dominant sedge, Carex pensylvanica Lam.. Seed density, richness, and composition showed weak relationships to forest age, and little resemblance to the ground vegetation, which changed markedly with forest development. Our results suggest that there is limited potential for recovery of most meadow species via the seed bank. Natural reestablishment of these species will require seed dispersal or gradual vegetative spread from existing openings, but competitive interactions with ruderal or forest species may limit recruitment or recovery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".