Odonate diversity in treed bogs in southwest Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to examine the diversity of odonates (dragonflies and damselflies) in treed bogs and the effect of adjacent forest harvesting on this diversity. Treed bogs are the most common wetland type in southwest Nova Scotia, yet they remain poorly understood. During the summers of 2005 and 2006, 1745 adult odonates representing 54 species were encountered during surveys of 26 treed bogs located in interior southwest Nova Scotia. This sample comprised ~47% of all known mainland Nova Scotia species, including a number of rare and specialized ones. On average, 11.54 species were found per study site, with richness ranging from 3 and 21 species. Canonical Correspondence Analysis was used to forwardly select environmental variables that were important in explaining species occurrences. Forest harvesting within 20 m of treed bogs and adjacent roads had the greatest influence on species occurrences, with individual species showing both positive and negative responses. Other forwardly selected variables, in order of decreasing importance, included pH, distance to nearest stream, tree density and bog type. Four species that are both restricted to bog habitats and rare in Nova Scotia were associated with lower than average forest harvesting and road disturbance. These particularly susceptible species were also associated with more heterogeneous treed bog study sites, and therefore these habitats have a higher biodiversity value and should be a priority for conservation. Understanding the nature of odonate diversity in treed bogs and the factors influencing this diversity will better inform management decisions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".