Effects of earthworms and warming on tree seedling growth: a small-scale microcosm experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Warming global temperatures are expected to strongly influence plant communities, yet there is limited knowledge of how these changes will interact with stressors such as the invasion of exotic earthworms. We conducted a small-scale microcosm experiment to assess the individual and interactive effects of warming and exotic anecic earthworms (Lumbricus terrestris L.) on the growth of sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marsh.) seedlings. After 50 days, the elevated-temperature chamber created warmer and drier soil conditions and increased several measures of plant growth, including stem width, ratio of stem width to stem height, stem biomass, and fine-root biomass. Earthworms did not have any clear impacts on plant growth on their own nor in interactions with the temperature chambers. However, earthworms both reduced surface leaf litter cover and exposed soils, which could exacerbate evaporative losses and moisture stress in field soils resulting from a warming climate under different growing conditions. Future studies should consider the long-term effects of earthworm–temperature interactions on sugar maple growth, as well as diurnal and seasonal changes in temperature.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".