(Table 1) Effects of experimental warming on plant cover and diversity indices in an evergreen shrub at Alexandra Fiord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Identifying plant communities that are resistant to climate change will be critical for developing accurate, wide-scale vegetation change predictions. Most northern plant communities, especially tundra, have shown strong responses to experimental and observed warming.2. Experimental warming is a key tool for understanding vegetation responses to climate change. We used open-top chambers to passively warm an evergreen-shrub heath by 1.0-1.3 °C for 15 years at Alexandra Fiord, Nunavut, Canada (79 °N). In 1996, 2000 and 2007, we measured height, plant composition and abundance with a point-intercept method.3. Experimental warming did not strongly affect vascular plant cover, canopy height or species diversity, but it did increase bryophyte cover by 6.3% and decrease lichen cover by 3.5%. Temporal changes in plant cover were more frequent and of greater magnitude than changes due to experimental warming.4. Synthesis. This evergreen-shrub heath continues to exhibit community-level resistance to long-term experimental warming, in contrast to most Arctic plant communities. Our findings support the view that only substantial climatic changes will alter unproductive ecosystems.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".