MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901760826 · doi:10.1111/avsc.12413

Classification of South Brazilian grasslands: Implications for conservation

2018· article· en· W2901760826 on OpenAlexaff
Bianca Ott Andrade, Camila Leal Bonilha, Gerhard E. Overbeck, Eduardo Vélez‐Martin, Rosângela Gonçalves Rolim, Sérgio Augusto de Loreto Bordignon, Ângelo Alberto Schneider, Cleusa Vogel Ely, Dióber B. Lucas, Élen Nunes Garcia, Emily D. dos Santos, Fábio Piccin Torchelsen, Mariana S. Vieira, Pedro Joel Silva da Silva Filho, Pedro Maria Abreu Ferreira, Rafael Trevisan, Raquel Hollas, Sérgio Campestrini, Valério D. Pillar, Ilsi Iob Boldrini

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Vegetation Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsBiomeGrasslandDominance (genetics)GeographyThreatened speciesEcologyVegetation (pathology)QuadratGrazingVegetation classificationBiologyHabitatEcosystemShrub

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims We offer a first classification of South Brazilian grasslands (Campos Sulinos) based on quantitative vegetation data and describing grassland types in terms of dominant and indicator species. Location South Brazilian grasslands (Paraná, Santa Catarina, Rio Grande do Sul states). Methods We described vegetation plots in 167 sampling units throughout the region using a stratified nested design, totalizing 1,502 1 m² quadrats. We classified vegetation using cluster analysis based on Bray–Curtis dissimilarities, establishing three vegetation types and ten subtypes. We conducted indicator species analysis within the resulting subtypes, and for all possible combinations of subtypes. Results In the cluster analyses, a clear separation of poorly drained grasslands from the drier sites appeared. Further, a clear distinction between grasslands in the South Brazilian highland region, situated in the Atlantic Forest biome, and the grasslands of the Pampa biome, to the south, emerged, reflecting climatic and management differences. Highland grasslands showed lower species cover dominance, while in the Pampa, Paspalum notatum clearly was the most important species and the abundance of exotic species was higher. Conclusions Our study provides the first classification of South Brazilian grasslands based on quantitative vegetation data recorded in a standardized sampling design. The data support the division of grasslands into the main phytogeographic units of the region (Brazilian biome classification). Grasslands in these two regions also differ in terms of species dominance pattern (higher dominance in Pampa grasslands, likely also due to higher grazing levels) and in terms of conservation state (low presence of exotic species in highland grasslands). Our results are important for conservation policies, which can now consider the presence of different grassland types in different region, but more data will be necessary for a more detailed classification that considers different abiotic features in more detail.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations133
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Vegetation ScienceSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207