Facilitative succession in a boreal bryophyte community driven by changes in available moisture and light
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Question: What are the drivers of bryophyte succession in paludifying boreal Picea mariana forests? Location: The Clay‐Belt of Quebec and Ontario, Canada. Methods: The bryophyte community and habitat variables (forest floor thickness, water table, stand density, canopy openness micro‐climate and presence of ericaceous species) were analysed in a chronosequence of 13 stands from 50 to more than 350 years since fire. Results: Across the chronosequence, feathermosses were replaced by shade and desiccation tolerant slower growing hummock Sphagna and then by faster growing hollow Sphagna. These changes were linked with both increasing light availability and the movement of the water table into the forest floor. Conclusions: As water table rise is dependent on forest floor thickness, which is in turn influenced by the presence of Sphagna, this successional sequence represents an example of facilitation. Furthermore, it emphasizes the importance of water table rise in determining stand level, and landscape level variables such as carbon balance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".