Soil properties and species diversity of grazed crested wheatgrass and native rangelands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertn.) is an introduced grass used extensively for rangeland revegetation in the semiarid and arid regions of western North America. The long-term effects of crested wheatgrass on soil properties and plant community were evaluated on 5 grazed sites in the southern interior of British Columbia, Canada. Each site included plant communities of native bluebunch wheatgrass (Pseudoroegneria spicata (Pursh) Scribn. & Smith) and 14- to 60-year-old stands of crested wheatgrass. Soil samples and plant data were collected in June 1997. Species numbers were similar for native and crested wheatgrass rangelands, while the diversity index of crested wheatgrass rangeland was lower due to lower evenness. Crested wheatgrass and native grasses were observed to produce similar amounts of root biomass. Most soil properties were similar under the 2 rangelands. One of the exceptions was soil carbon at 0–7.5 and 7.5–15 cm depths, which was higher on crested wheatgrass than native rangeland. Soil nitrogen at 15–30 cm depth was also higher on crested wheatgrass rangeland. Greater soil penetration resistance was observed at 7.5 and 9 cm depths on crested wheatgrass than native rangeland. Higher soil compaction was caused by grazing of crested wheatgrass earlier in the season when soils are wetter relative to the native rangeland. The results of this study indicate that seeding of crested wheatgrass combined with the long-term grazing by cattle did not result in the degradation of soil properties, but plant diversity was reduced relative to grazed native, bluebunch wheatgrass rangeland.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".