Bibliographic record
Abstract
A program was initiated in the spring of 1985 to study the direct effects of aerial application of the herbicide glyphosate on target and non-target vegetation in the boreal forest region of southeastern Manitoba. During the last decade glyphosate has been used increasingly in silviculture practices in Manitoba and Canada. Eleven study sites were monitored from 1985 to 1994 to assess the effects of various rates of glyphosate applications on the vegetation of forest ecosystems. Control (unsprayed) and treated (sprayed) sampling sites were established in two recently burned areas, a mature aspen stand, a forest plantation, and an area where an accidental spill of glyphosate had occurred in the past. A separate study was established to specifically address the effects of glyphosate on available ungulate browse material. Data on the available browse from six forage species were collected from the control and treated bum and aspen stand areas. Results from vegetation monitoring differed from site to site. The vegetation of one site in the treated aspen stand showed little evidence of adverse effects following glyphosate application when applied at a rate of 2.5 lIha in 1985 and in 1986. This was likely due to poor
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.684 | 0.542 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".