MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784279099 · doi:10.1111/grs.12192

Quantifying the influences of grazing, climate and their interactions on grasslands using Landsat TM images

2018· article· en· W2784279099 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dandan Xu, Nicola Koper, Xulin Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueGrassland Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland Management and Livestock Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPriority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education InstitutionsChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsGrazingGrasslandEnvironmental scienceGrassland ecosystemPrecipitationConservation grazingVegetation (pathology)EcosystemClimate changeEcologyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Appropriate grazing management ensures sustainable productivities of grassland ecosystems while maintaining grassland services. Thus, it is important to understand the influences of grazing management on grassland ecosystems, which can be monitored by measuring grassland response (e.g. leaf area index [LAI]) to grazing management. However, the measured grassland response includes the impact not only of grazing management, but also of other factors and their interactions, such as climate variability and fire. Therefore, to better study the effects of grazing management, grassland response to grazing needs to be quantified separately from that of other factors which influence grasslands and their interactions. The aim of our research was to quantify these interactions using Landsat thematic mapper (TM) images with long‐term datasets at a regional scale. We studied vegetation using a manipulative grazing experiment that applied a range of low to high cattle stocking rates from 2008 to 2011 in a northern native mixed‐prairie in Saskatchewan. Results show that precipitation, temperature, interaction between temperature and precipitation, cattle density, interaction between temperature and cattle density, and the interaction among cattle density and climate parameters explained 65.5, 14.5, 9.8, 1.7, 1.4 and 0.5% of the variation in grassland LAI, respectively; thus, precipitation has the dominant effect in mixed‐grass prairies, while temperature and the interaction between temperature and precipitation have only moderate effects, and grazing intensity and the interaction between grazing intensity and climate variations have relatively low effects. The results also suggest that grassland response to grazing can be quantitatively separated from that of climate variability with the prior knowledge of grazing intensity, even though the influences of precipitation on LAI overrode the effects of short term grazing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGrassland ScienceSame topicRangeland Management and Livestock EcologyFrench-language works237,207