The abundance and reproductive success of the orchid <i>Calypso bulbosa</i> L. in relation to forest structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This seven-year study investigated the effects of forest structure and fragmentation on the Calypso orchid (Calypso bulbosa) (Orchidaceae). The species was found to prefer growing sites in the interior of the forest and near small openings. Proximity to clear-cuts and to openings had no effect on reproductive success. High canopy cover and shrub cover reduced the number of plants, while high shrub cover reduced the number of flowering plants. This in turn may affect the behaviour of bumblebees (Bombus spp.), the main pollinators of the Calypso orchid, and their ability to find and pollinate a plant. The number of flowering and pollinated plants was higher in large populations than in small ones. The long-term reproductive success of large populations, as measured by flower and fruit production, was more stable than that of small populations. Despite its status as a strictly protected species, the Calypso orchid is threatened by forest management, particularly in privately owned forests. Nature-friendly harvesting methods, such as selection harvesting and small-gap harvesting without soil preparation, may prove to be appropriate forest management practices in the species’ sites.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".