MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079366376 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2005.0341

Invasive exotic plants suffer less herbivory than non-invasive exotic plants

2005· article· en· W2079366376 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyHerbivoreInvasive speciesIntroduced speciesNative plantAllelopathyEcologyPlant tolerance to herbivoryWeedPlant ecologyBotanyGermination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We surveyed naturally occurring leaf herbivory in nine invasive and nine non-invasive exotic plant species sampled in natural areas in Ontario, New York and Massachusetts, and found that invasive plants experienced, on average, 96% less leaf damage than non-invasive species. Invasive plants were also more taxonomically isolated than non-invasive plants, belonging to families with 75% fewer native North American genera. However, the relationship between taxonomic isolation at the family level and herbivory was weak. We suggest that invasive plants may possess novel phytochemicals with anti-herbivore properties in addition to allelopathic and anti-microbial characteristics. Herbivory could be employed as an easily measured predictor of the likelihood that recently introduced exotic plants may become invasive.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.186 · 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