Phylogenetic turnover patterns consistent with niche conservatism in montane plant species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary A fundamental aim in community ecology is to elucidate the processes structuring communities. The key to understanding community patterns is to account for species differences and similarities in how they respond to large‐scale environmental gradients and partition local resources. Using phylogenetic relationships as a representation of species’ ecological differences, we use phylogenetic beta‐diversity ( PBD ) to examine how patterns of community relatedness change across space. Specifically, we examine how PBD informs our understanding of the processes (spatial or environmental) directing species assembly along montane environmental gradients – in particular, whether patterns are consistent with niche conservatism. Also, we examine the depth of phylogenetic turnover to see where in evolutionary history shared environmental tolerances appear conserved. For angiosperm communities situated to the east and west of the Continental Divide ( CD ) in the Rocky Mountain National Park in CO , USA , we compare nine beta‐diversity indices (taxonomic, TBD : Jaccard , Bray–Curtis and Gower ; PBD : PhyloSor, UniFrac, D nn , D pw , Rao's D and Rao's H ) to changes in space, environment and environment controlling for space with the partial PROTEST method. We find that PBD differs from taxonomic beta‐diversity and some PBD metrics were redundant with one another (i.e. Rao's D & D pw and UniFrac & PhyloSor ). The indices’ different sensitivities to evolutionary depth affected their responses to environmental and spatial gradients: TBD consistently associated greater with all factors (space, environment and environment controlled for space) than PBD metrics; PBD metrics more sensitive to recent changes were more highly correlated with all factors than those metrics sensitive to turnover deeper in the phylogeny. Generally, beta‐diversity associated strongest with environment and least with space. Synthesis . Taxonomic and phylogenetic beta‐diversity complements each other to provide an enhanced perspective of the process governing community structure. Together, they depict patterns expected under niche conservatism for the Rocky Mountain angiosperm communities, that is, species’ names change faster than their evolutionary relationships across space.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".