MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153468395 · doi:10.1139/as-2020-0047

Ambient and experimental warming effects on an alpine bryophyte community

2021· article· en· W3153468395 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kristel van Zuijlen, Johan Asplund, Snorre Sundsbø, Oda Sofie Dahle, Kari Klanderud

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBryophyte Studies and Records
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsBryophyteAbundance (ecology)Alpine plantEcologySpecies richnessGlobal warmingClimate changeSpecies evennessEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alpine and Arctic bryophytes have been found to respond negatively to climate change, but as they are often analysed as one functional group, there is limited knowledge on species-specific responses. In this study, we examine how nearly two decades of experimental warming by open-top chambers and ambient warming have affected the bryophyte community structure in an alpine Dryas octopetala L. heath in Finse, southwest Norway. In contrast to what we expected, we found that bryophyte abundance, species richness, and evenness increased over time in the control plots, indicating a positive response to ambient warming. However, the increase in bryophyte abundance and cover was suppressed in experimentally warmed plots compared with control plots. Bryophyte community composition changed in a similar direction in response to both ambient and experimental warming. Acrocarpous mosses were not affected stronger by warming than pleurocarpous mosses, but individual species and taxa showed contrasting responses. Our study highlights the importance of studying bryophyte responses to environmental change, as well as combining long-term observations with experimental warming.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicBryophyte Studies and RecordsFrench-language works237,207