MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403073101 · doi:10.1002/ecy.4438

A global database of soil seed bank richness, density, and abundance

2024· article· en· W4403073101 on OpenAlexaff
Alistair G. Auffret, Emma Ladouceur, Natalie S. Haussmann, Eirini Daouti, Tatiana G. Elumeeva, Ineta Kačergytė, Jonas Knape, Dorota Kotowska, Matthew Low, V. G. Onipchenko, Matthieu Paquet, Diana Rubene, Jan Plue

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRangeland and Wildlife Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecies richnessEcologySoil seed bankArable landHabitatDatabaseAbundance (ecology)PopulationShrublandBiomeGeographyBiodiversityAgricultureEcosystemBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A soil seed bank is the collective name for viable seeds that are stored naturally in the soil. At the species or population level, the ability to form a seed bank represents a strategy for (re)colonization following a disturbance or other change in the local environmental conditions. At the community level, seed banks are thought to buffer local diversity during periods of environmental change and are often studied in relation to the potential for passive habitat restoration. The role that seed banks play in plant population and community dynamics, as well as their importance in the agricultural sector, means that they have been widely studied in ecological research. This database is the result of a comprehensive literature search, including all seed bank studies from the Web of Science from which data could be extracted, as well as an additional search of the Russian language literature. The database contains information on the species richness, seed density, and/or seed abundance in 3096 records from at least 1929 locations across the world's seven continents, extracted from 1442 studies published between 1940 and 2020. Records are grouped into five broad habitat categories (aquatic, arable, forest, grassland-including shrubland-and wetland), including information relating to habitat degradation from, or restoration to other habitats (total 14 combinations). Sampling protocols were also extracted for each record, and the database was extensively checked for errors. The location of each record was then used to extract summary climate data and biome classification from external published databases. The database has several potential uses. The large geographical spread relative to many other global biodiversity datasets is relevant for investigating patterns of diversity in biogeographical or macroecological contexts. Habitat type and status (intact, degraded, and restored) can be used to provide insights for biodiversity conservation, while the potential effects of sampling method and effort can be used to inform optimized data collection for future seed bank studies. This database is released under the CC-BY license.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0290.031
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.014

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicRangeland and Wildlife ManagementFrench-language works237,207