Edge influence on plant litter biomass in forest and savanna in the Brazilian <i>cerrado</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Edge influence, characterized by differences in ecosystem characteristics between the edge and the interior of remnants in fragmented landscapes, affects a variety of organisms and ecosystem processes. An important feature that may be affected by edges is the amount of plant litter, which provides important habitat for a large variety of organisms and influences ecological processes such as fire dynamics. We studied edge influence on plant litter and fine woody debris in the cerrado of São Paulo state, south‐eastern Brazil. We collected, sorted, dried and weighed plant litter along 180 m‐long transects perpendicular to three savanna and eleven forest edges adjacent to different anthropogenic land uses, with four to five transect per edge. There tended to be less biomass of the finer portions of fine woody debris at both savanna and forest edges. Graminoid litter at savanna edges was greater than in the corresponding interior areas, whereas other litter portions were either unaffected by edges or did not show consistent patterns in either savanna or forest. Edge influence was usually restricted to the first 20 m from the edge, was not influenced by edge characteristics and exhibited no clear differences between savanna and forest areas. Several mechanisms may have led to the variable patterns observed including variation in the plant community, plant architecture, and invasive species. The edge‐related variation in plant litter may putatively lead to, for example, increased fire frequency and intensity at the savanna edges and altered trophic dynamics at forest edges; the mechanisms and consequences of this edge influence should be addressed in future studies.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".