Controlling Purple Jewelweed (<i>Impatiens glandulifera</i>): Assessment of Feasibility and Costs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We experimentally tested the feasibility of a control campaign of purple jewelweed ( Impatiens glandulifera ), an exotic invasive species in Europe and North America. We evaluated the amount of time and money required to control the plant along riverbanks, with particular attention paid to the recovery of riparian vegetation following hand pulling and bagging. Work time was directly and significantly related to stem density and fresh biomass of the invader, but the relationship was stronger for density. Density and biomass were strongly reduced by the first hand-pulling operation from a mean of 45 to 2 stems m −2 and from a mean of 0.95 kg m −2 to nearly zero, a good performance but not enough to negate the need for a second hand pulling later in the summer. A single hand pulling significantly reduced the cover of purple jewelweed from to 30% to 7%. Riparian vegetation disturbed by the first hand pulling largely recovered during the following 30 d. Expressed over an area of 1 ha, the total amount of time required to control purple jewelweed is 1,400 work hours over 2 yr, or a minimum investment of Can$21,000 (US$17,000). Although controlling a well-established purple jewelweed population is expensive, to properly evaluate the benefits, we must also consider the costs of soil erosion caused by this species.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it