Impact of the origin of sites planted with hybrid poplar on plant community composition and diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intensively managed fast-growing tree plantations may affect plant diversity, and we have little knowledge on how it is affected by site origin in order to better orientate site selection for their establishment. The aim of this study was thus to determine the impact of site origin on plant diversity in intensively managed hybrid poplar plantations. We investigated vascular and non-vascular plant communities within fast growing hybrid poplar plantations (PEH) established on abandoned agricultural lands (AAL) with herbaceous or shrubby vegetation, and on previously forested lands, and compared them to adjoining non-afforested surrounding sites. Our results show that PEH plantations established on herbaceous and shrubby AALs had similar or higher plant diversity even though they contained no forest species after 15 years. When established on previously forested lands, PEH plantations favored the establishment of ruderal species compared to their non-reforested equivalents, but plant diversity and richness tended to decrease following plantation establishment. Thus, if site selection is made to preserve or increase plant diversity, abandoned agricultural lands should preferentially be chosen rather than previously forested sites to install intensively managed hybrid poplar plantations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".