Intraspecific Variation in Ecophysiology of Three Dominant Prairie Grasses Used in Restoration: Cultivar Versus Non‐Cultivar Population Sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dominant species play crucial roles in determining plant community structure and ecosystem function. Cultivars of the dominant prairie grasses are widely used in prairie restoration and are selected for characters such as high biomass production, increased reproductive output, and stress tolerance. Genetic differences exist between cultivar and non‐cultivar population sources of dominant tallgrass prairie species, which may have implications for plant performance in prairie restoration. We measured net photosynthesis ( A net ), stomatal conductance ( g s ), and water use efficiency (WUE) in cultivar and non‐cultivar dominant tallgrass prairie species Andropogon gerardii Vitman, Sorghastrum nutans (L.) Nash, and Schizachyrium scoparium (Michx.) Nash in both a greenhouse experiment and an experimental tallgrass prairie restoration. We found indicators of enhanced physiological performance (higher A net, g s, and/or WUE) in cultivar population sources of all three dominant grass species relative to non‐cultivars. For A. gerardii , cultivars exhibited higher A net and WUE than non‐cultivars. For S. nutans , cultivars exhibited higher g s, whereas non‐cultivars showed higher WUE. Lastly, cultivars of S. scoparium showed higher WUE than non‐cultivar population sources. Our results show that population selection of dominant species in restoration can have consequences for plant performance, which may have implications for competitive interactions that affect community structure (i.e. diversity) and ecosystem function (i.e. aboveground net primary production) during the reassembly of prairie systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".