{"id":"W2566753052","doi":"10.1111/ecog.02539","title":"Do metacommunity mass effects predict changes in species incidence and abundance?","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Ecography","topic":"Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":7,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"McGill University; National Science Foundation","keywords":"Metacommunity; Abundance (ecology); Relative abundance distribution; Ecology; Relative species abundance; Null model; Ecological succession; Macroecology; Context (archaeology); Fragmentation (computing); Extinction (optical mineralogy); Rare species; Population; Species richness; Biology; Geography; Biological dispersal; Habitat; Demography","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":true,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003136278,0.000460436,0.0004204153,0.0009388792,0.0002830356,0.001106914,0.0007205743,0.000755618,0.001575624],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01665239,0.0004275257,0.0008477616,0.0005948538,0.0006506803,0.001804537,0.0006734822,0.0005992134,0.0004291854],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0007231661,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0003994684,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.01545027,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.02417008,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9991485,0.0003257283,0.0000381205,0.0002498773,0.0000802154,0.0001575923],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9893277,0.00600805,0.002387237,0.00115899,0.0005538938,0.0005640898],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.0001238436,0.00006443373,0.9762564,0.00001757203,0.0001882243,0.00003247498,0.0001129144,0.01566323,0.00108895,0.00056385,0.0001903095,0.005697901],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00002047953,0.0001361437,0.7953016,0.00001704978,0.0001106127,0.000136175,0.0001906468,0.1988713,0.0008210938,0.003816468,0.0005548991,0.00002364257],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9929146,0.00009202024,0.00539085,0.0001840464,0.000008004977,0.0000135006,0.0002791312,0.00004651176,0.001071351],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9990605,0.00002381918,0.0006105523,0.00002184429,0.000004704274,0.000005627332,0.0001198498,0.000007691298,0.0001455219],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.01545027,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.03072065,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.007016323833718696,"score_gpt":0.213021937095438,"score_spread":0.2060056132617193,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}