Herbivore‐mediated material fluxes in a northern deciduous forest under elevated carbon dioxide and ozone concentrations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anthropogenic changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2 ) and ozone (O3 ) are known to alter tree physiology and growth, but the cascading effects on herbivore communities and herbivore-mediated nutrient cycling are poorly understood. We sampled herbivore frass, herbivore-mediated greenfall, and leaf-litter deposition in temperate forest stands under elevated CO2 (c. 560 ppm) and O3 (c. 1.5× ambient), analyzed substrate chemical composition, and compared the quality and quantity of fluxes under multiple atmospheric treatments. Leaf-chewing herbivores fluxed 6.2 g m(-2) yr(-1) of frass and greenfall from the canopy to the forest floor, with a carbon : nitrogen (C : N) ratio 32% lower than that of leaf litter. Herbivore fluxes of dry matter, C, condensed tannins, and N increased under elevated CO2 (35, 32, 63 and 39%, respectively), while fluxes of N decreased (18%) under elevated O3 . Herbivore-mediated dry matter inputs scaled across atmospheric treatments as a constant proportion of leaf-litter inputs. Increased fluxes under elevated CO2 were consistent with increased herbivore consumption and abundance, and with increased plant growth and soil respiration, previously reported for this experimental site. Results suggest that insect herbivory will reinforce other factors, such as photosynthetic rate and fine-root production, impacting C sequestration by forests in future environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".