MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319387299 · doi:10.2298/abs150911032k

The effects of Douglas fir monoculture on stand characteristics in a zone of Montane beech forest

2016· article· en· W2319387299 on OpenAlexaff
Olga Kostić, Snežana Jarić, Gordana Gajić, Drаgаnа Pаvlović, Milica Marković, Miroslava Mitrović, Pavle Pavlović

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Biological Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest ecology and management
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
FundersMinistarstvo Prosvete, Nauke i Tehnološkog Razvoja
KeywordsBeechLitterMonocultureForest floorDouglas firEnvironmental scienceBiodiversitySoil fertilityOld-growth forestForest ecologyAgronomyEcosystemEcologyBotanyAgroforestrySoil waterBiologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The right choice of tree species to form forest cultures is of paramount importance to the preservation of the diversity, fertility and ecological stability of forest ecosystems. To that end, we examined the effect of a 40-year-long cultivation of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb) Franco) on the floristic composition, characteristics of the forest floor, physical and chemical properties of the soil and the intensity of organic matter decomposition in a beech forest in western Serbia (Mt. Maljen). It was found that the cultivation of Douglas fir caused a reduction in biodiversity, changes in the chemical properties of the soil, that were most pronounced in the surface layers (0-10 cm), and a slowing down in the metabolism of the beech stand. The absence of many plant species characteristic to natural beech forests was observed in the Douglas fir plantation, these were reflected in the detected changes in the chemical properties of the soil, such as lower substitutional acidity (p<0.05), depletion of the adsorption of basis in the cation complex (p<0.001) and lower amounts of C, N, P (p<0.001) and K (p<0.01) in relation to the beech stand (control). No differences were found in soil moisture and active acidity levels. The higher value of the C/N ratio of the Douglas fir litter (p<0.001) provided proof for its lower decomposition rate compared to beech litter (p<0.05). Over time, all these changes could lead to further acidification and degradation of the soil and a reduction in this ecosystem?s productivity.

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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.927

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 studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Biological SciencesSame topicForest ecology and managementFrench-language works237,207