MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How human disturbance of tropical rainforest can influence avian fruit removal

2009· article· en· W2015409926 on OpenAlexaff
Kara L. Lefevre, F. Helen Rodd

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrugivoreRainforestUnderstoryHabitatSeed dispersalBiologyEcologyAbundance (ecology)Tropical rainforestDisturbance (geology)Secondary forestOld-growth forestCanopyGuildBiological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fruit consumption by birds is an important ecological interaction that contributes to seed dispersal in tropical rainforests. In this field experiment, we asked whether moderate human disturbance alters patterns of avian frugivory: we measured fruit removal by birds in the lower montane rainforest of Tobago, West Indies, using artificial infructescences made with natural fruits from two common woody plants of the forest understory ( Psychotria spp., Rubiaceae). Displays were mounted simultaneously in three forest habitats chosen to represent a gradient of increasing habitat disturbance (primary, intermediate and disturbed), caused by subsistence land use adjacent to a protected forest reserve. We measured the numbers of fruits removed and the effect of fruit position on the likelihood of removal, along with the abundances of all fruits and fruit‐eating birds at the study sites. Fruit removal was highly variable and there was not a significant difference in removal rate among forest habitats; however, the trend was for higher rates of removal from displays in primary forest. Canopy cover, natural fruit availability, and frugivore abundance were not good predictors of fruit removal. Birds preferred more accessible fruits (those proximal to the perch) in all habitats, but in disturbed forest, there was a tendency for distal fruits to be chosen more frequently than in the other forest types. One possible explanation for this pattern is that birds in disturbed forests were larger than those in other habitats, and hence were better able to reach the distal fruits. Coupled with differences in bird community composition among the forest types, this suggests that different suites of birds were removing fruit in primary versus disturbed forest. As frugivore species have different effectiveness as seed dispersers, the among‐habitat differences in fruit removal patterns that we observed could have important implications for plant species experiencing disturbance; these possible implications include altered amounts of seed deposition and seedling recruitment in Tobago's tropical rainforest.

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 score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207