Local variation in bryophyte and macro-lichen cover and diversity in a montane forest
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The patterns of cover and species diversity (richness and composition) of macro-lichens, bryophytes and vascular plants are described for a Canadian montane forest. The forests of the study area are highly valued both for wood production and for the terrestrial lichen that is a vital part of the diet of the endangered woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou Gmelin). In 180 6.5 m x 6.5 m plots, we found lichens were abundant, but the ground layer was dominated by feather moss. Species richness is similar for the three groups at close to 10 species per plot for each group. Differences in species composition are small with any two sites having at least 50% of their vascular plants, 60% of their bryophytes, and 70% of their lichens in common. Comparisons of the 10% most open and 10% densest sites revealed that more open sites have greater lichen cover, higher elevation, older trees, more vascular plant species, less moderately decayed logs, and lower cover of Pleurozium schreberi, the dominant feather moss. However, the data are inconclusive with respect to predicted changes post-harvesting, since none of the correlations is particularly strong.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it