MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Ground Beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidea) Community Structure as an Indication of Disturbance in Stoney Creek, Burnaby, BC

2013· article· en· W29050067 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alia Romhanyi, Angie Skidmore

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRiparian zoneCanopyEcologyDisturbance (geology)UnderstoryHabitatSpecies evennessGeographyVegetation (pathology)ForestryEnvironmental scienceSpecies diversityGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the impact of constructing an off-channel pond in Stoney Creek, Burnaby, BC to ground dwelling arthropods, carabid beetles were sampled at three sites: the pond site, the adjacent site, and the upstream site. The pond site was the area in which the artificial pond was constructed to create spawning habitat for salmon, and it was the most disturbed site. The other two sites were relatively undisturbed and were used as a comparison. Species observed in all sites were forest generalists consisting of both native and invasive species. This indicates that all sites have experienced recent disturbance since significant time has not passed to allow specialists to become re-established. Species evenness, however, was calculated to be lowest in the pond site, greatest in the upstream site, and intermediate in the adjacent site. This is due to the different characteristics of each site; the pond site had an open canopy as most of its vegetation had been removed, the upstream site was dominated by tall trees and is characteristic of a natural riparian zone in BC, and the adjacent site had a relatively open canopy as much of the understory was dominated by Hedera helix (English ivy) and Rubus ameniacus (Himilayan blackberry). Unfortunately, statistical analysis could not be performed since a small number of individuals were caught at each site; the impact of the off-channel pond construction is inconclusive. Future studies can, however, use this study as a comparison and further elaborate on these results.

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)0.001
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 score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicForest Ecology and Biodiversity Studies→French-language works237,207→