MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074794077 · doi:10.1111/icad.12112

Seral changes in ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) assemblages in the sub‐boreal forests of British Columbia

2015· article· en· W2074794077 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Higgins, B. Staffan Lindgren

Bibliographic record

VenueInsect Conservation and Diversity · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaThompson Rivers University
FundersCentre for Engineering Research and Development
KeywordsSeral communityEcologySpecies richnessPinus contortaBiologyChronosequenceEcological successionGeographyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite their ubiquity, ant assemblages in the sub‐boreal forests of British Columbia, Canada, are largely unknown. Ant assemblages and area densities of species colonies were characterised in lodgepole pine‐leading forests through strip‐plot hand sampling of coarse woody debris ( CWD ), with species richness supplementation through pitfall trapping and mini‐Winkler sampling of forest floor litter, over five seral ages. Seventeen species of ants were identified across all seral ages. Ant assemblage dissimilarity (non‐metric multidimensional scaling) determined from CWD (i.e. ordination separation between sites) decreased through early seral ages then began to increase in later seral ages. Despite a species richness curve superficially consistent with competitive exclusion developing in later seral ages, the overall decline in all species abundances with advancing seral age, the low colony densities, and the persistence of only an ecologically subordinate species in the oldest seral age, argued against competitive exclusion and for a thermally based hypothesis of evolved species tolerance. Successional facilitation and examples of the role of individual life history characteristics were also noted with seral progression.

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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.235
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsect Conservation and DiversitySame topicInsect and Arachnid Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207