Establishing a Diverse Assemblage of Native Grasses and Forbs on a Knapweed-Infested Site in the Bass River Recreation Area, Ottawa County, Michigan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extensive areas of degraded lands and remnant natural areas in the upper Midwest have been invaded by the non-native perennial, spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa Lam.). Reestablishment of native plant communities requires the application of effective control measures. The objective of our study was to examine the interactive effects of mowing and chemical site preparation treatments (herbicides) combined with hand pulling on spotted knapweed control and native plant establishment on a knapweed-infested site in western Michigan. Initial mowing and herbicide treatments were applied to forty-eight plots in the summer of 2008, and we seeded these plots with a mixture of native grasses and forbs in the spring of 2009. We hand pulled seed-producing knapweed from selected plots in mid-summer, 2009, and determined residual knapweed densities and native plant occurrence on all plots in late July, 2009. All site preparation treatments began to reduce the knapweed soil seedbank, while both glyphosate and clopyralid herbicides substantially reduced mature spotted knapweed densities. Hand pulling effectively reduced seed-producing knapweed densities to less than 0.5 plants m-2 on mowed and glyphosate-treated plots; hand pulling was unnecessary on clopyralid plots because mature knapweed were totally absent in 2009. Only clopyralid, however, reduced juvenile and seedling knapweed densities significantly. Planted native warm-season grasses were present on all treatment combinations, but full development of a diverse native plant community is expected to take several years. Some combination of herbicide treatment and hand pulling of knapweed is recommended to facilitate reestablishment of a native plant community on knapweed-infested sites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".