MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2534437175 · doi:10.1080/11956860.2016.1212684

Late snow melt moderates herbivore disturbance of the Arctic tundra

2016· article· en· W2534437175 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
H Anderson, James D. M. Speed, Jesper Madsen, Åshild Ønvik Pedersen, Ingunn Tombre, René van der Wal

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraEcologySnowmeltVegetation (pathology)PopulationEnvironmental scienceHerbivoreForagingArcticBiologySurface runoff

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Resilience of tundra vegetation to disturbance by herbivores can be low and lead to ecosystem state shifts. Pink-footed geese Anser brachyrhynchus are the most numerous herbivore on Svalbard and disturb vegetation when foraging for below-ground plant biomass (grubbing). We assessed grubbing extent (occurrence of vegetation disturbance) and intensity (proportion of vegetation disturbed) in 2006/07/08 when goose numbers were approximately 56,000 and in 2013 when they increased to approximately 81,000. Despite a 36% increase in population size, in 2013 the grubbing extent at pre-breeding sites was similar to that in 2007/08 but grubbing intensity was lower. Extensive snow cover in 2013 probably dispersed geese over larger areas in search of snow-free patches for feeding, thereby reducing grubbing intensity. At the largest known breeding site, both grubbing extent and intensity increased with more geese. Birds preferentially fed close to nests in previously grubbed wet habitat, probably aiding nest defence and permitting feeding on plants that were easier to remove from the soil. A greater impact on tundra vegetation may occur at nesting areas if the breeding population continues to grow. However, timing of snowmelt appears key in moderating the impact of disturbance on tundra vegetation since it controls spatial distributions of feeding geese.

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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207