EMBRAPA FLORESTAS | Soil macrofauna communities in various land use systems in Itatinga, São Paulo, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil macrofauna communities were evaluated in February 2014 in a number of land use systems in Itatinga, São Paulo state, Brazil. At the University of São Paulo Forestry Department Experimental Station, the following land uses were studied: 1) a mixed Eucalyptus grandis and Acacia mangium tree plantation; 2) an Acacia mangium tree plantation; 3) a Eucalyptus grandis tree plantation; and 4) a semi-deciduous native Atlantic Forest fragment. At a private farm in the Distrito de Lobo, the following land uses were sampled: 1) a mixed Eucalyptus grandis and Acacia mangium tree plantation; 2) an Acacia mangium tree plantation; 3) a Eucalyptus grandis tree plantation; 4) a sugarcane plantation; and 5) a permanent pasture. At the Fazenda Americana of the Duratex Company, a Eucalyptus sp. plantation was sampled on two soil textural types: a sandy clay loam and a clay loam. Samples were taken using the standard methodology of the Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility Programme (TSBF), where soil (down to 20 cm depth) and litter fauna were hand-sorted from monoliths of 25x25 cm, and the abundance of a total of 42 taxa was assessed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".