MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255400414 · doi:10.1139/b00-109

The effect of gopher mounds and fire on the spatial distribution and demography of a short-lived legume in tallgrass prairie

2000· article· en· W4255400414 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kelly S. Wolfe‐Bellin, Kirk A. Moloney

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIowa Department of Natural ResourcesIowa State University
KeywordsEcologyFecunditySpatial heterogeneitySurvivorship curveSpatial distributionGeographyBiologyCompetition (biology)PopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many studies have reported that gopher mounds can increase species diversity and spatial heterogeneity of plant communities, but few studies have experimentally linked these small-scale disturbances to spatial heterogeneity in the distribution of individual plant populations. In this study, we directly tested for a spatial relationship between the pattern of gopher mound production and the distribution of a short-lived legume, Medicago lupulina L., across a tallgrass prairie remnant. In addition, we conducted a 3-year study examining the demographic response of M. lupulina to mound and off-mound planting treatments, during which a spring fire occurred one year. We found that the spatial distribution of M. lupulina was positively correlated with the distribution of mounds. Germination was significantly greater off mounds in all years, while survivorship and fecundity were significantly greater on mounds in the 2 years without fire. During the fire year, survivorship was significantly greater off mounds and fecundity was approximately equal on and off mounds. We conclude that the positive spatial relationship between M. lupulina and mounds is caused by the direct dependence of M. lupulina on mounds for survivorship in most years. Gopher mounds provide microsites where plant competition and risk of herbivory are reduced. Overall, gopher mounds can directly produce spatial heterogeneity in the plant community, but the strength of this effect may be significantly modified in some years, particularly those in which a spring fire occurs.Key words: gopher mounds, fire, Medicago lupulina, disturbance, prairie, introduced species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207