Colonization of restored peatlands by insects : Diptera assemblages in mined and restored bogs in eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of peatland restoration on Diptera assemblages was studied across multiple organizational levels (taxon, size class, trophic group) among abandoned-mined, restored and natural sites of three bogs and the environmental variables affecting those assemblages were determined. More than 22,000 individuals representing 716 species were collected using pan traps, sweeping and Malaise traps. Restored and abandoned sites were similar to each other and both distinct from natural sites as shown by small-size class, acalyptrate and trophic assemblages. However, abandoned sites showed much lower evenness and generally supported lower species richness than restored and natural sites, due to the dominance of one or two saprophagous species. The coverage of bare peat, Sphagnum mosses and ericaceous shrubs explained most of the variance in species composition. Those results suggest that restoration enhanced the recovery of high species diversity, although more than seven years are needed to recover a complete trophic structure or to enable species with low dispersal ability to recolonize to pre-disturbance levels.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".