Effects of afforestation drainage on <i>Sphagnum</i> spore banks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persistent spore banks may play a significant role in the maintenance of bryophyte populations. However, the impact of afforestation drainage on Sphagnum spore banks remains rarely known. In two drained peatlands of northeastern China, peat cores were obtained from near-pristine (high water table— Sphagnum), moderately drained (low water table— Sphagnum), and severely drained areas (low water table—shrub) for Sphagnum spore bank analysis. Quantitative properties of spore banks were compared among the areas with different drainage intensity. Our results indicate that drainage experienced by the two peatlands generally reduced the spore accumulation rate in the peatlands, and the intensified aerobic decomposition following drainage also led to spore bank loss. After drainage, the germinability of the Sphagnum spores was significantly enhanced probably due to dormancy releasing. This may deplete Sphagnum spore bank in the long run. Our study suggests that rewetting practice in drained peatlands is needed to conserve Sphagnum spore banks and maintain the potential for restoring peatland vegetation after serious disturbance.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".