MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fine‐scale spatial heterogeneity and incoming seed diversity additively determine plant establishment

2012· article· en· W1953837599 on OpenAlexaff
Paul J. Richardson, Andrew S. MacDougall, Douglas W. Larson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphOntario Aggregate Resources CorporationUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Diversity (politics)Plant diversitySpatial heterogeneitySpatial ecologyGeographyEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiologyBiodiversityCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 1. Plant establishment is critical for community assembly, but mechanisms regulating establishment can be obscured by covarying influences of incoming seed diversity and fine‐scale spatial environmental heterogeneity (microhabitat heterogeneity). Both can maximize establishment, depending on whether species differences or environmental variability more fundamentally structures plant communities. 2. We experimentally assembled limestone‐pavement herb communities to examine the relative effects of seed diversity and microhabitat heterogeneity on establishment. This included testing (i) whether effects of seed diversity strengthen with heterogeneity, as would be expected if potential niche differences are more strongly expressed in more heterogeneous environments and (ii) whether a greater number of incoming species can establish in more heterogeneous environments due to environmental filtering. Species interaction theory predicts that increased facilitation and niche complementarity with realized diversity has the potential to increase overall community density. 3. Heterogeneity operated independently of seed biodiversity and explained establishment even when spatially averaged microhabitat conditions were accounted for. Homogeneous plots sown with six species supported establishment of plant density that could be increased c. 10% by doubling added seed diversity (while holding heterogeneity constant), but increased c. 40% by holding seed diversity constant and maximizing heterogeneity. 4. Ordinations revealed that species establishment was sorted by gradients in soil pH and surface cover by moss, litter and open bedrock. Regressions indicated more species established in plots featuring a greater diversity of surface cover types and/or greater soil depth variability. Community density increased with established richness, and heterogeneity ceased to explain variance in density once established richness was included as an explanatory variable. All but one of the sown species exhibited increased population density with increased plot richness. 5. Synthesis: Community density in a high‐stress environment increased with both fine‐scale spatial heterogeneity and added seed diversity. However, these effects were independent of one another, and impacts of heterogeneity were stronger than those of seed diversity. Our results suggest heterogeneity promotes density indirectly, through downstream effects of enhanced establishment diversity such as facilitation. These findings confirm establishment‐stage interrelationships among biodiversity, density and heterogeneity as overlooked determinants of community structure by providing important field support for ideas primarily tested in the greenhouse.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations34
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207