MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388981751 · doi:10.3398/064.083.0203

Silver Sagebrush (Artemisia cana) Survival and Regrowth after Fire in the Mixed Grass Prairie

2023· article· en· W4388981751 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Comfort, Eric G. Lamb

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern North American Naturalist · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyHumanitiesForestryBiologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La artemisa plateada (Artemisia cana) es una especie de arbusto bajo común en las praderas mixtas septentrionales que constituye un importante hábitat para la fauna salvaje. Históricamente, el hábitat de la artemisa plateada ha sufrido frecuentes incendios forestales, pero los esfuerzos de control de incendios posteriores al asentamiento han reducido su frecuencia. Los efectos del fuego sobre el crecimiento y la regeneración de la artemisa plateada no se conocen con claridad. Este estudio examinó los efectos del fuego en la regeneración de la artemisa plateada, utilizando datos sobre el tamaño y la distribución de las plantas una temporada después del incendio. Los sitios de estudio se ubicaron en la pradera mixta septentrional de Saskatchewan, Canadá, e incluían pastizales en los que la comunidad vegetal se encontraba en recuperación tras incendios controlados y un incendio forestal intenso. La artemisa plateada respondió al fuego produciendo nuevos brotes a través de rizomas, y algunas plantas también se regeneraron desde la corona. No se observaron plántulas. Las plantas más grandes y los rodales densos de artemisa plateada tuvieron mayor éxito de regeneración que los rodales delgados. Estos resultados demuestran que la recuperación de la artemisa plateada es principalmente vegetativa, siendo rara la mortalidad de clones.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern North American NaturalistSame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207