Invasive ants alter the phylogenetic structure of ant communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Invasive species displace native species and potentially alter the structure and function of ecological communities. In this study, we compared the generic composition of intact and invaded ant communities from 12 published studies and found that invasive ant species alter the phylogenetic structure of native ant communities. Intact ant communities were phylogenetically evenly dispersed, suggesting that competition structures communities. However, in the presence of an invasive ant species, these same communities were phylogenetically clustered. Phylogenetic clustering in invaded communities suggests that invasive species may act as strong environmental filters and prune the phylogenetic tree of native species in a nonrandom manner, such that only a few closely related taxa can persist in the face of a biological invasion. Taxa that were displaced by invasive ant species were evenly dispersed in the phylogeny, suggesting that diversity losses from invasive ant species are not clustered in particular lineages. Collectively, these results suggest that there is strong phylogenetic structuring in intact native ant communities, but the spread of invasive species disassembles those communities above and beyond the effect of simple reductions in diversity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".