MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2372172220

Effects of forest restoration types on soil quality in red soil eroded region, Southern China

2004· article· en· W2372172220 on OpenAlexaff
Hua Zheng, Zhiyun Ouyang, Xiaoke Wang, Miao Hong, Tongqian Zhao, Peng Tingbai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicForest, Soil, and Plant Ecology in China
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRed soilEnvironmental scienceSoil qualitySoil retrogression and degradationVegetation (pathology)AgroforestrySlash (logging)Forest restorationRestoration ecologyDisturbance (geology)FirewoodForest ecologyForestryEcosystemGeographyEcologySoil waterSoil science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Land degradation and restoration is one of the greatest challenges in subtropical hilly regions. In Southern China, the area of hilly red soil region accounts for 2.0×10~6 km~2. During recent decades, as a result of increasing demand for firewood, timber and food——human disturbance has destroyed vegetation in the region. Due to the vegetation destruction, the region was given the name, “red desert”. As a result, restoring vegetation and improving soil quality became urgent affairs of the region. It is very important to explore the effects of forest restoration types on soil quality for the restoration and management of such degraded ecosystems. In this study, four typical forest restoration types in the hilly red soil region were selected at the Ecological Benefit Monitoring Station of the Yangtze River Protection Forest——the hilly red soil region of Southern Hunan Province, which is located in the small valley of Changchong Village, Langlong Country, Hengyang County of Hunan Province. The four types are natural secondary forest, tea-oil camellia plantation, Chinese fir plantation, slash pine plantation, and the control which was frequently disturbed. The paper reports on the responses of the soil's physical, chemical and biological properties to the four forest restoration types. From the results of this study, a soil quality index that integrated 13 soil quality indicators was calculated. In addition, the relationships between the soil's physico-chemical and biological indicators were analyzed. Results showed that: different forest restoration types lead to significant differences in the soil's physico-chemical and biological properties. The soil quality of selected plots was ranked as follows: 1) natural secondary forest 2) tea-oil camellia plantation 3) Chinese fir plantation 4) slash pine plantation 5) control. The indices of soil quality for the natural secondary forest, tea-oil camellia plantation, Chinese fir plantation, slash pine plantation, and control were 0.95, 0.68, 0.55, 0.36 and 0.04, respectively. The control possessed the lowest soil quality. The soil quality under the natural secondary forest was the highest among four forest restoration approaches. Natural restoration was an effective approach to improving soil quality at the early stage of restoring. The factors influencing the soil quality of plantations and the control were inappropriate artificial tending, lower litter fall production and quality, lower microbial structure and function, and nutrients loss. The findings indicate that among the 13 soil quality indicators, microbial biomass carbon, substrate richness index and Shannon's diversity index significantly correlated with other 9, 10, 9 indicators respectively. For selecting the soil quality indicator, the microbial biomass carbon combined with microbial function diversity was the better indicator for reflecting soil biological activity and soil quality.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations15
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest, Soil, and Plant Ecology in ChinaFrench-language works237,207