MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A meta‐analytical review of the effects of elevated CO<sub>2</sub> on plant–arthropod interactions highlights the importance of interacting environmental and biological variables

2012· review· en· W2074616560 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant responses to elevated CO2
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsHerbivoreArthropodBiologyInteractionEcologyMetabolitePhotosynthesisBotanyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We conducted the most extensive meta‐analysis of plant and animal responses to elevated CO 2 to date. We analysed &gt; 5000 data points extracted from 270 papers published between 1979 and 2009. We examined the changes in 19 animal response variables to the main effect of elevated CO 2 . We found strong evidence for significant variation among arthropod orders and feeding guilds, including interactions in the direction of response. We also examined the main effects of elevated CO 2 on: six plant growth and allocation responses, seven primary metabolite responses, eight secondary metabolite responses, and four physical defence responses. We examined these response variable changes under two‐way and three‐way interactions between CO 2 and: soil nitrogen, ambient temperature, drought, light availability, photosynthetic pathway, reproductive system, plant growth rate, plant growth form, tissue type, and nitrogen fixation. In general we found smaller effect sizes for many response variables than have been previously reported. We also found that many of the oft‐reported main effects of CO 2 obscure the presence of significant two‐ and three‐way interactions, which may help better explain the relationships between the response variables and elevated CO 2 . Contents Summary 321 I. Introduction 322 II. Methods 323 III. Herbivore responses to elevated CO 2 328 IV. Plant responses 329 V. Searching for general responses to elevated CO 2 332 VI. Limitations and future studies 334 Acknowledgements 335 References 335

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.225 · 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