MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982625944

Invasive Earthworms in the Crown of the Continent System and Implications for Land Management

2022· other· en· W6982625944 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Mathematics Enthusiast · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarthwormBiodiversityEcosystemLand useIntroduced speciesInvasive speciesLand managementEcosystem engineerSoil carbon
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United States contains invasive earthworms originating from Europe and Asia; the majority are European lumbricids. Direct introduction occurs primarily through human activity and, once established, earthworm populations are difficult to address. When exotic earthworms engage in bioturbation, they negatively alter subterranean food webs and nutrient cycling by disrupting soil layering systems. The most prominent form of physical alteration is the change and removal of the topmost organic layer. This disruption is associated with altered nitrogen and carbon cycling, as well as altered forest floor plant communities. The Crown of the Continent ecosystem is located in southwestern Alberta, southeastern British Columbia and northwestern Montana. This unique transboundary system is home to distinct biodiversity and is less altered by humans than many other ecosystems. The presence of exotic earthworms introduces new challenges for land managers and local soil systems. Current US policy offers an ineffective “innocent until proven guilty” attitude towards introduced species. Preventing spread and mitigating the effects of exotic earthworms is needed to preserve soil quality. Non-native earthworms and earthworm products could be banned and/or restricted by land managers to prevent further spread. Supplemental action, such as invasive species education programs, can enhance preventative practices.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Mathematics EnthusiastSame topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207