MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312354252 · doi:10.1071/sr21286

Earthworms and soil mesofauna as early bioindicators for landfill restoration

2022· article· en· W4312354252 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSoil Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInvertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityOntario Forest Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil mesofaunaSoil biologyTopsoilEnvironmental scienceLand reclamationEarthwormBioindicatorSoil qualitySoil healthEcologySoil organic matterSoil scienceSoil waterBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context Landfill activities physically disrupt soil habitats. When restoring landfill to ‘soft’ end uses such as woodland, the appropriate stockpiling and reapplication of native topsoil to provide suitable soil habitats may enhance soil fauna recolonisation and reduce restoration timeframes. Aims We studied the influence of reclamation practices on earthworm and mesofauna communities, and evaluated the role of earthworms and soil mesofauna as bioindicators of early landfill restoration success. Methods We investigated soil physico–chemical parameters, and earthworm and soil mesofauna communities at two restored landfill sites and the surrounding land uses. We also applied the QBS-collembola (QBS-c) and QBS-earthworm (QBS-e) index techniques in a reclaimed landfill setting. Results Natural colonisation of reclaimed landfill by earthworms occurred rapidly where original site topsoil was stockpiled, reapplied, and revegetated. QBS-e and QBS-c indices indicated that the most disturbed sites generally had the lowest soil biological quality. Mesofauna richness and abundance were generally higher in the low-disturbance sites. Conclusions and implications We demonstrate the value of recording a range of soil invertebrates during land reclamation, since different soil bioindicator groups respond differently to soil disturbance. QBS-c and QBS-e index techniques alongside traditional soil macro- and mesofauna assessments reinforced our observed soil fauna responses to reclamation practices. Thus, we encourage multitaxon soil monitoring during land reclamation. Where landfill restoration was carried out to a poor standard, results suggest that soil mesofauna are better indicators of soil status than earthworms. For future restoration schemes, best-practice methods are recommended to improve poor-quality reclaimed soil materials to facilitate rapid soil fauna recolonisation and soil structural development.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.230 · 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