Changes in grassland songbird abundances through time in response to burning and grazing in the northern mixed-grass prairie.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study considered the long term effects and interaction between burning and grazing in the northern mixed-grass prairies on the grassland songbird community. Point counts were conducted to assess songbird species abundances in burned-grazed, burned-ungrazed, unburned-grazed, and unburned-ungrazed pastures along with habitat structure (litter depth, vegetation height and density) over a five year period; from the first year post burn in 2007 until the fifth year post burn in 2011. Generalized linear mixed models were used to analyse the interaction between year, burning, and grazing for songbird abundances and habitat structure. As time since burned increased, species abundances in burned-grazed pastures have become more similar with those in unburned-grazed while abundances in burned-ungrazed are becoming increasingly similar to those in unburned-ungrazed pastures. The effects of burning are different than those of grazing and both disturbances should be utilised in grassland management when possible.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".