MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035957286 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2020-0176

Influence of moisture, nutrients, and distance from stream on early-stage mass loss of western red cedar leaf litter in headwater riparian forests

2020· article· en· W3035957286 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Tonya L. Ramey, Cindy E. Prescott, John S. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRiparian zoneNutrientLitterEnvironmental sciencePlant litterPhosphorusEcologyHabitatBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Western red cedar (Thuja plicata Donn ex D.Don) is a dominant species in forests of the Pacific Northwest in North America, but little is known about its decomposition in riparian habitat. We experimentally tested how early-stage mass loss of cedar leaf litter varied with distance from the stream (five distances from 1 to 40 m away) and responded to nutrient and water additions near four headwater streams in southwestern British Columbia. We ran three coarse-mesh litterbag trials in durations between five months to one year from January 2013 and January 2014. Litterbags were either untreated or given the following treatments: water additions during dry summer months, nitrogen and phosphorus additions, or additions of both. Control litterbags lost 21% initial mass over 12 months (January 2013 – January 2014), 20% over five months (January 2013 – June 2013), and 15% over eight months (June 2013 – January 2014). Rates of mass loss did not increase with water in any trial but did increase with nutrients in the 12-month trial. Litter located 40 m from the stream lost 7% more mass than that located 1 m away in this same trial. Our study indicates that cedar leaf litter mass loss responded primarily to nutrient additions.

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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207