Juvenile mortality and attacks by a specialist herbivore increase with conspecific adult basal area of Amazonian <i>Swietenia macrophylla</i> (Meliaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the Janzen–Connell model, host-specific natural enemies can promote species coexistence of canopy trees in tropical forests by attacking progeny where they are most concentrated. However, empirical evidence relating negative density-dependent mortality to herbivory and, in particular, attack by specialist herbivores, remains rare. We investigated density dependence in a natural population of Swietenia macrophylla in a south-eastern Amazon forest of Brazil. Across 24 adult trees, we found that initial juvenile densities were positively correlated with basal area of adult conspecifics whereas subsequent survivorship over 1 y for these juveniles declined strongly with increasing basal area of adult conspecifics. For 18 trees with > 5 juveniles surviving for 1 y, further evidence supporting the Janzen–Connell mechanism was obtained in that leaf herbivory and attack by a specialist microlepidopteran moth (Steniscadia poliophaea) increased, and overall foliar condition decreased, with conspecific basal area. Moreover, when differences in mean juvenile size (number of extant leaves) were accounted for, juvenile survival over 1 y decreased with increased specialist leaf herbivory. Collectively, these results indicate that herbivores, in particular S. poliophaea, may contribute to density dependence among S. macrophylla juveniles. We conclude that the survival of juveniles and their probability of recruitment into the canopy is decreased where conspecific adults are largest and/or most numerous and find support for the importance of host-specific pests in driving density dependence among tropical trees.
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".