Wild bee biodiversity in tallgrass prairie and oak savanna habitat in southern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tallgrass prairie and oak savanna support appreciable biodiversity and are among the most threatened habitats in Canada, yet little is currently known about which bee species occur in these habitats and how management might affect their abundance and diversity. Here, we ask how restoration and management practices in tallgrass prairie and oak savanna affect bee communities in southern Ontario. Bee communities, vegetation plots and environmental characteristics were sampled in remnant, burnt, restored, and naturalized sites at three localities. Although bee communities were markedly different at the three sampled localities (separated by at least 114 km) with only 19% of total species shared, consistent trends in bee community metrics among management types across localities were found. Remnant sites had lower abundance, species richness, and Shannon diversity than other management types in most cases. Greater canopy cover and more woody debris were associated with remnant and burn sites and greater floral abundance with restored sites. These research outcomes will have implications for restoration ecology, habitat management, and bee conservation in tallgrass prairie and oak savanna.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".