MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7109631670 · doi:10.26108/2awg-hd89

Biodiversity assessment of riparian areas, upper Cornwallis River and tributaries

2008· article· en· W7109631670 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAcadiaU-DEV · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRiparian zoneHabitatSpecies richnessWatershedBiodiversityInvertebrateTributaryAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Annapolis Valley, Nova Scotia, Canada has a long history of agricultural use and has experienced an intensification of farming practices during the last century. Agricultural land use patterns have contributed to the accumulation of pollutants in the Cornwallis River and the loss of regional biodiversity. Riparian areas filter water, trap sediment and provide habitat for a variety of wildlife. We explored the relationship between terrestrial biodiversity, land use and agricultural practices along riparian areas in the Tri-brook Watershed of the upper Cornwallis River. We identified 17 study sites in four different biotopes in riparian areas. Birds and terrestrial invertebrates were sampled as indicator taxa to assess terrestrial biodiversity. A point count bird survey was conducted in June and terrestrial invertebrates were collected in pit fall traps in July. We also completed a Riparian Health Assessment (RHA) at each study site and a plot- : based vegetation survey. There were 113 individual birds found within our study sites representing 17 different species. We captured 1540 carabid beetles from 24 species. Using correspondence analysis and regression models we determined a significant relationship among forest cover, bird diversity and the RHA. There was a significant negative relationship between carabid richness and RHA. Declining grassland birds were found at sites which were classified as unhealthy by the RHA. Involvement of farmers and landowners in the development of a watershed stakeholder group must be considered essential in the management of agricultural riparian zones and the enhancement of habitat for terrestrial wildlife.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.188 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcadiaU-DEV→Same topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology→French-language works237,207→