Soil mite communities (Acari: Mesostigmata) as indicators of urban ecosystems in Bucharest, Romania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to establish the effect of management type and of environmental variables on the structure, abundance and species richness of soil mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) in twelve urban green areas in Bucharest-Romania. Three categories of ecosystem based upon management type were investigated: protected area, managed (metropolitan, municipal and district parks) and unmanaged urban areas. The environmental variables which were analysed were: soil and air temperature, soil moisture and atmospheric humidity, soil pH and soil penetration resistance. In June 2017, 480 soil samples were taken, using MacFadyen soil core. The same number of measures was made for quantification of environmental variables. Considering these, we observed that soil temperature, air temperature, air humidity and soil penetration resistance differed significantly between all three types of managed urban green area. All investigated environmental variables, especially soil pH, were significantly related to community assemblage. Analysing the entire Mesostigmata community, 68 species were identified, with 790 individuals and 49 immatures. In order to highlight the response of the soil mite communities to the urban conditions, Shannon, dominance, equitability and soil maturity indices were quantified. With one exception (numerical abundance), these indices recorded higher values in unmanaged green areas compared to managed ecosystems. The same trend was observed between different types of managed green areas, with metropolitan parks having a richer acarological fauna than the municipal or district parks.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".