Effects of plant functional group removal on structure and function of soil communities across contrasting ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used a biodiversity manipulation experiment that has been running for 19 years across a chronosequence consisting of 30 forested islands in two adjacent lakes in the boreal zone of northern Sweden This experiment involves a full factorial combination of three different plant functional group removals (8 treatments in total) i.e., tree root removal (performed by root trenching), ericaceous shrub removal (performed manually), and feather moss removal (performed manually) This dataset includes five sheets: PLFA = Measure of PLFA markers + bacterial and fungal biomasses (nmol g-1) Nematode = Nematode biomass (ind g-1) and trophic community composition Metabarcoding= OTU count FungalAssignation = Assignation of eah OTU to a fungal guild EnvVar = Plant biomass and soil abiotic factors + outputs variables (i.e., decomposition rates + SIR + NMR) All the details are provided in the sheet Information
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.019 |
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".