Effect of grazing, trampling, and fecal deposition on vegetation and soil nutrients, Yukon Kuskokwim Delta Alaska, 2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herbivores play a key role in the turnover, gains and losses of nutrients in ecosystems. Because nutrients are often limiting, herbivores influence plant growth and chemistry, and their own resource supply. Herbivores typically affect their environment in three ways: they consume aboveground biomass, they trample soil, and they return nutrients to soil via waste materials. The relative importance of these pathways is often unexplored because it requires conducting experiments that isolate these effects. Millions of geese migrate in the spring to sub-arctic coastal wetlands where they play a key role in determining the amount and quality of forage in this habitat. We conducted two field experiments on Carex subspathacea grazing lawns in western Alaska to investigate how these individual processes (grazing, trampling, and fecal addition) influence foliage quality (C:N) and soil nutrients. We isolated goose herbivory effects with five treatments: grazing only, trampling only, fecal addition only, all three treatments combined (full herbivory), and no herbivory.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".