MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016754730 · doi:10.1111/oik.01493

Assessing the relative importance of neutral stochasticity in ecological communities

2014· article· en· W2016754730 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Vellend, Diane S. Srivastava, Kathryn M. Anderson, Carissa D. Brown, Jill E. Jankowski, Elizabeth J. Kleynhans, Nathan J. B. Kraft, Alathea Diana Letaw, A Macdonald, Janet E. Maclean, Isla H. Myers‐Smith, Andrea R. Norris, Xinxin Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcologyCommunity structureCLARITYEconometricsTraitCommunityGeographyBiologyEconomicsComputer scienceHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A central current debate in community ecology concerns the relative importance of deterministic versus stochastic processes underlying community structure. However, the concept of stochasticity presents several profound philosophical, theoretical and empirical challenges, which we address here. The philosophical argument that nothing in nature is truly stochastic can be met with the following operational concept of neutral stochasticity in community ecology: change in the composition of a community (i.e. community dynamics) is neutrally stochastic to the degree that individual demographic events – birth, death, immigration, emigration – which cause such changes occur at random with respect to species identities. Empirical methods for identifying the stochastic component of community dynamics or structure include null models and multivariate statistics on observational species‐by‐site data (with or without environmental or trait data), and experimental manipulations of ‘stochastic’ species colonization order or relative densities and frequencies of competing species. We identify the fundamental limitations of each method with respect to its ability to allow inferences about stochastic community processes. Critical future needs include greater precision in articulating the link between results and ecological inferences, a comprehensive theoretical assessment of the interpretation of statistical analyses of observational data, and experiments focusing on community size and on natural variation in species colonization order. Synthesis Community structure and dynamics have often been described as being underlain by ‘stochastic’ or ‘neutral’ processes, but there is great confusion as to what exactly this means. We attempt to provide conceptual clarity by specifying precisely what focal ecological variable (e.g. species distributions, community composition, demography) is considered to be stochastic with respect to what other variables (e.g. other species' distributions, traits, environment) when using different empirical methods. We clarify what inferences can be drawn by different observational and experimental approaches, and we suggest future avenues of research to better understand the role of neutral stochasticity in community ecology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.156
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.156
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations475
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207