Accelerated seed dispersal along linear disturbances in the Canadian oil sands region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Habitat fragmentation is typically seen as inhibiting movement via erosion in connectivity, although some patterns of early-phase disturbance, such as narrow linear disturbances in otherwise undisturbed forests, may actually facilitate the dispersal of certain species. Such features are common in Alberta’s oil sands region as legacies from seismic hydrocarbon exploration used to map oil reserves. Many of the ecological implications of these disturbances are unknown. Here, we investigate the effect of these forest dissections by experimentally testing dispersal patterns along seismic lines compared with adjacent forests using two proxy materials for wind-dispersed seeds, Typha latifolia seed and goose down feathers. We found that wind speeds were up to seven times higher and 95th percentile seed dispersal distances nearly four times farther on seismic lines compared with undisturbed forests and the corresponding effect of these features on seed dispersal distances can be substantial, potentially facilitating future changes in composition and ecological processes in boreal forests. This raises important considerations for native and invasive species, particularly in the context of climate change and the associated importance of seed movement and migration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".