MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7019036853

Evaluating the Success of Ontario Roadside Restorations - An Ecosystem Approach

2021· dissertation· en· W7019036853 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVegetation (pathology)Restoration ecologyEcosystemNative plantBiodiversityGrasslandEndangered speciesWildlifePlant community
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ecological restoration, or assisting the recovery of damaged ecosystems, is recognized as a crucial activity for reversing biodiversity loss across the globe. Roadside rights-of-way may be suitable areas for the restoration of endangered grassland communities, because they occupy significant areas of underutilized land, are managed as early successional plant communities, and may serve as corridors for wildlife movement and gene flow. However, though many roadside restoration projects have been undertaken in North America, few studies have evaluated their long-term success and most monitoring is narrow in scope. True restoration includes restoring an appropriate species composition, vegetation structure and ecosystem functions, and thus these ecosystem components must be measured when evaluating success. I assessed the plant community, bee community, soil carbon and plant-fungal relationships at roadside restorations of various ages along three major highways in Southern Ontario and compared these measures to unrestored roadsides and reference sites. I found that roadside restorations successfully increased native plant richness, though not to the level of a remnant grassland. Bee communities varied mostly by highway rather than site type, though bee abundance was positively correlated with plant diversity and bare ground. Soil carbon in roadside sites was similar to that of a remnant grassland but did not differ among restored and control sites. Plant growth response to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi collected from roadside sites varied depending on the site and showed a weak negative correlation with site age. Taken together, these results suggest that roadside restoration can benefit some ecosystem components, but simply seeding native plants along roadsides may not be sufficient for improving ecosystem function. This study highlights the importance of evaluating success in a comprehensive manner that includes multiple ecosystem components.

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 score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)Same topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207