MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6929590342 · doi:10.5061/dryad.0k6djhb90

Land-use legacies affect flower visitation network structure after forest restoration

2024· dataset· en· W6929590342 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDRYAD · 2024
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsUnderstoryRestoration ecologyAgricultureNestednessAgricultural landForest restorationCanopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agricultural land use causes drastic changes to ecosystems, which persist after agricultural activity has stopped. One way to mitigate these impacts is through restoration of post-agricultural lands; however, the interplay between agricultural history and restoration remains poorly understood. This is particularly true for interactions among species. We investigated the effect of experimental restoration of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) forests with differing land use histories on floral visitation networks. We found that restoration of open canopy conditions caused drastic increases in floral and floral visitor abundance and species richness. We found that after restoration, plots with no history of agriculture supported more specialized floral visitations and networks than in post-agricultural plots. These results illustrate large positive effects of forest restoration and flowering of understory plants and floral visitation, along with a persistent agricultural land-use legacy affecting the structure of floral visitation networks that is still evident 66 years after agricultural abandonment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDRYADSame topicStatistical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207