MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403885698

Landscape components associated to forestry in the Atlantic rainforest influence the aquatic macroinvertebrate community: a case study in southern Brazil

2022· article· en· W4403885698 on OpenAlexaff
Enzo Luigi Crisigiovanni, Rodrigo Felipe Bedim Godoy, Elynton Alves do Nascimento

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEcology and Conservation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRainforestGeographyForestryAtlantic forestEcologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies indicate that negative impacts on water quality are minimally related to forestry. We analyzed the water quality of a stream in a silvicultural region in southern Brazil, considering the relationship between the components of the landscape and biotic quality indexes, merging physical and biological descriptions of the macroinvertebrate community and environment. We selected three points in Faxinalzinho stream to collect macroinvertebrate samples and to perform perceptual analysis from September to December/2014, applying the Biological Monitoring Working Party (BMWP') and the Rapid Assessment Protocol for Habitat Diversity (RAPHD). Diversity metrics and a Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMDS) were also applied to explore variations in the aquatic community abundance matrix, associating the data to Land Use/Land Cover. The results showed good water quality in the studied points, mainly when compared to urban rivers. However, we found negative effects in the site with higher forestry land cover, presenting acceptable water quality and altered environmental condition according to BMWP’ and RAPHD, while the other sites presented excellent water quality and natural environment, respectively.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicEcology and Conservation StudiesFrench-language works237,207