MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7000018903

Effects of past grazing management on songbirds and plants in rested pastures: the potential for grazing management to influence habitat in the landscape following livestock exclusion

2016· dissertation· en· W7000018903 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersParks Canada
KeywordsNucleofectionExclosureHyporeflexiaGestational periodTSG101Proteogenomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grasslands are the most threatened terrestrial ecosystem in the world, and as they decline the species that depend on them also decline. Variable stocking rates and resting rangeland could be used by range managers to manipulate plant cover and create wildlife habitat. I used generalized linear mixed-models to evaluate how effects of rest on vegetation and songbirds varied based stocking rates previously applied from 2006-2014 in Grasslands National Park, Canada. My results indicate, in the mixed-grass prairie, succession is retrogressive following rest, and both vegetation and songbirds are resilient to grazing. Recovery of songbirds was linked to the recovery of habitat structure. Songbirds with flexible habitat requirements, such as Savannah and grasshopper sparrows, responded rapidly to livestock exclusion. The retrogressive nature of succession in mixed-grass prairie offers managers an opportunity to take chances when attempting to create wildlife habitat with livestock grazing, as risk of irreversible change is relatively low.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207