Herbivores limit the population size of big‐leaf mahogany trees in an Amazonian forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Janzen–Connell hypothesis proposes that specialized herbivores maintain high numbers of tree species in tropical forests by restricting adult recruitment so that host populations remain at low densities. We tested this prediction for the large timber tree species, Swietenia macrophylla , whose seeds and seedlings are preyed upon by small mammals and a host‐specific moth caterpillar Steniscadia poliophaea , respectively. At a primary forest site, experimental seed additions to gaps – canopy‐disturbed areas that enhance seedling growth into saplings – over three years revealed lower survival and seedling recruitment closer to conspecific trees and in higher basal area neighborhoods, as well as reduced subsequent seedling survival and height growth. When we included these Janzen–Connell effects in a spatially explicit individual‐based population model, the caterpillar's impact was critical to limiting Swietenia 's adult tree density, with a > 10‐fold reduction estimated at 300 years. Our research demonstrates the crucial but oft‐ignored linkage between Janzen–Connell effects on offspring and population‐level consequences for a long‐lived, potentially dominant tree species.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".