Early establishment of Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine in grassland seedbeds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Grassland of interior British Columbia are being encroached upon by Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca (Beissn.) Franco) and ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa Dougl.). A pot experiment placed in the field was conducted to determine the effect of forest and grassland seedbeds on seedling emergence and early establishment of the 2 species with 2 seed collections each. For these seedbeds, structural characteristics were evaluated and the effect of seedbeds water extracts on seed germination was determined. Seedling emergence of both species was significantly reduced by Douglas-fir needles and enhanced by fescue litter and cattle manure compared to mineral soil. The rate of emergence was reduced by Douglas-fir needles and sagebrush litter, and for some collections, by ponderosa pine needles, but was always enhanced by manure compared to mineral soil. Seedling survival was generally not affected by seedbeds. Douglas-fir seedlings emerging earlier in the season survived better, and both Douglas-fir and ponderosa pine seedlings emerging earlier lived longer than these emerging later. Seed germination of ponderosa pine was not affected by the water extract while that of Douglas-fir was reduced by the water extract from sagebrush litter. Therefore, differences in seedling emergence of the 2 species among seedbeds were related more to structural than to chemical characteristics of seedbeds. Successful establishment of the 2 species in grasslands within this region likely relies on the ability of seeds to germinate early in the growing season on seedbeds in which soil moisture is conserved, as summer droughts are severe.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".