Origin matters: alien consumers inflict greater damage on prey populations than do native consumers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim Introduced alien species are frequently implicated in ecosystem disruption and biodiversity loss, but some ecologists have recently argued that efforts to manage ecosystems should be refocused on known problematic species without regard to whether such species are native or alien. This argument rests on the premise that native and alien species in general do not differ in their impacts. Although there are numerous cases that suggest alien predators and herbivores can sometimes cause severe declines or even local extinctions of native species, very few studies have compared the impacts of native and alien consumers on native populations. Location World‐wide. Methods We have conducted a meta‐analysis on a global dataset to compare the effects of native and alien predators and herbivores on native populations occupying a broad range of terrestrial and aquatic environments. Results The distribution of positive, negative and neutral effects on native prey abundance differed significantly by consumer origin, with alien consumers associated with more negative and fewer positive effects than expected, opposite the finding for native consumers. The effect size of alien consumers was 2.4 times greater than that of native consumers and did not differ between predators and herbivores. The impact of alien consumers did not differ significantly in aquatic (lakes, rivers, oceans) versus terrestrial (continental, island) habitats. Similarly, there was no significant interaction between consumer origin and location, as consumers had similar effects in insular (freshwater, island) and open (continental, marine) systems – contrary to the notion that alien species impacts are mainly problematic for island biota. Main conclusions We hypothesize that the ecological naïveté of native biota facilitates their enhanced suppression by alien predators and herbivores relative to native enemies. Our results counter the assertion that the biogeographical origin of species has no bearing on their ecological impact.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 | 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 it