Fates of Added Nitrogen in Freshwater Arctic Wetlands Grazed by Snow Geese: The Role of Mosses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that the growth of freshwater grasses and sedges eaten by breeding colonies of Snow Geese responds weakly to nitrogen additions, and also is poorly able to compensate within the same season for tissues lost to geese. These results contrast with the rapid responses to grazing and fertilization that have been observed in salt-marsh species. A possible explanation is that the mosses prominent in freshwater wetlands rapidly sequester added nitrogen, preventing access by forage species to the fecal inputs provided by foraging geese. To investigate this hypothesis, I added ecologically realistic amounts of ammonium and nitrate labelled with 15N to the surface and rooting zone of experimental plots in freshwater wetland vegetation at two Snow Goose colonies. Results indicate that the presence of mosses did not prevent forage species from rapidly taking up ammonium and nitrate added either at or below the moss surface. Nonetheless, most of the added 15N was absorbed by the moss layer; consequently, mosses tend to divert nitrogen away from forage species and into long-lasting peat. In the long term, this may reduce the ability of freshwater forage plants to recover from damage by increasing populations of Snow Geese.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".