MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2041214841 · doi:10.1139/z01-002

Changes in trophic abundance of soil arthropods along a grass-shrub-forest gradient

2001· article· en· W2041214841 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Steven H. Ferguson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsBiologyEcologyAbundance (ecology)Trophic levelPredationShrublandShrubHabitatProductivity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ecological theory suggests that along productivity gradients, abundances of organisms within trophic levels will increase in a stepwise pattern from producers to consumers. To test this theory I investigated changes in abundance of soil arthropods at three trophic levels: microphytophages, represented by Collembola, predacious mites (Acari) that feed on Collembola, and three groups of macroarthropods (spiders, ants, and centipedes) that were observed to feed on mites. Changes in abundance were monitored along a gradient in vegetation structure from grass to shrub to forest in the Canadian prairies. I controlled for temporal variation in abundance among years and surveys within a year. As predicted, (i) numbers of Collembola did not change with increases in productivity; (ii) mite numbers were greatest in the shrublands; and (iii) numbers of macroarthropod predators increased from grassland to shrubland, and there was a nonsignificant increase in numbers of spiders and centipedes in forest habitat. Contrary to predictions, macroarthropod numbers were not significantly greater in forest habitat, and ant numbers actually declined. Possible explanations for the lack of increase in macroarthropod predator abundance in the forest habitat with the greatest productivity include decreased ground-level humidity and greater abundance of macroarthropod predators and parasites in forest environments.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 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

Citations26
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies→French-language works237,207→