MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391512378 · doi:10.1007/s11258-023-01393-3

Comparison of edge effects from well pads and industrial roads on mixed upland boreal forest vegetation in Alberta

2024· article· en· W4391512378 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jennifer Buss, Anna Dabros, Kellina L. Higgins, H.E. James Hammond, Jaime Pinzón, David W. Langor

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Ecology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceOffice of Energy Research and DevelopmentNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Forest Service
KeywordsTaigaApplied ecologyPlant ecologyVegetation (pathology)BiodiversityBorealEcologyEnvironmental scienceGeographyAgroforestryForestryPhysical geographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The industrial footprint of oil and gas extraction in Alberta, Canada dissects the landscape in a network of linear and polygonal disturbances such as roads and well pads. The changes to biotic and abiotic factors beyond the boundaries of these disturbances into the adjacent ecosystem are called edge effects. A common assumption is that edge effects are proportional to the width of the disturbance, with wider disturbances leading to deeper effects into the forest. The objective of this study is to compare edge effects on plant composition, seed dispersal distance, seed weight, and microclimate across three disturbance types: narrow (< 20 m) and wide (> 20 m) roads, and well pads (> 100 m; 1.9 ha) in upland boreal forests in the oil sands region of north-eastern Alberta. We sampled 1 m 2 plots at six distances (0 m, 10 m, 15 m, 25 m, 50 m, and 75 m) along transects running perpendicular from the disturbance edge into the forest. Edge effects for plant communities were contained at the disturbance edge for all disturbance types considered. Understory species richness was lower at the disturbance edge and was dominated by introduced species and species with lighter seeds and with medium-distance dispersal mechanisms. Disturbance edges were characterized as having higher soil moisture content, higher soil temperature, and a thinner organic matter layer compared to the forest interior (> 10 m). With no effect of disturbance width on width of edge effects, our study does not support the assumption that narrower disturbances will necessarily result in narrower edge effects for vegetation and abiotic metrics.

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 score0.155
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant EcologySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207