MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971871476 · doi:10.1086/523945

Nontrophic Interactions, Biodiversity, and Ecosystem Functioning: An Interaction Web Model

2007· article· en· W1971871476 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Goudard, Michel Loreau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityEcosystemEcologyTrophic levelMutualism (biology)Biomass (ecology)Food webEcosystem diversityEcosystem servicesBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research into the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning has mainly focused on the effects of species diversity on ecosystem properties in plant communities and, more recently, in food webs. Although there is growing recognition of the significance of nontrophic interactions in ecology, these interactions are still poorly studied theoretically, and their impact on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning is largely unknown. Existing models of mutualism usually consider only one type of species interaction and do not satisfy mass balance constraints. Here, we present a model of an interaction web that includes both trophic and nontrophic interactions and that respects the principle of mass conservation. Nontrophic interactions are represented in the form of interaction modifications. We use this model to study the relationship between biodiversity and ecosystem properties that emerges from the assembly of entire interaction webs. We show that ecosystem properties such as biomass and production depend not only on species diversity but also on species interactions, in particular on the connectance and magnitude of nontrophic interactions, and that the nature, prevalence, and strength of species interactions in turn depend on species diversity. Nontrophic interactions alter the shape of the relationship between biodiversity and biomass and can profoundly influence ecosystem processes.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations113
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207