Inversion of plant dominance–diversity relationships along a latitudinal stress gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species interactions affect plant diversity through the net effects of competition and facilitation, with the latter more prevalent in physically stressful environments when plant cover ameliorates abiotic stress. One explanation for species loss in invader-dominated systems is a shift in the competition-facilitation balance, with competition intensifying in areas formerly structured by facilitation. We test this possibility with a 10-site prairie meta-experiment along a 500-km latitudinal stress gradient, quantifying the relationships among abiotic stress, exotic dominance, and native plant recruitment over five years. The latitudinal gradient is inversely correlated with abiotic stress, with lower latitudes more moisture- and nutrient-limited. We observed strong negative effects by invasive dominant grasses on plant establishment, but only in northern sites with lower-stress environments. At these locations, disturbance was critical for recruitment by reducing the suppressive dominant (invasive) canopy. In more stressful environments to the south, the impacts of the dominant invaders on plant establishment became facilitative, and diversity was more limited by seed availability. Disturbance prevented recruitment because seedling survival depended on a protective plant canopy, presumably because the canopy reduced temperature or moisture stress. Seed limitation was similarly prevalent in all sites. Our work confirms the importance of facilitation as an organizing process for plants in higher-stress environments, even with transformations of species composition and dominance. It also demonstrates that the mechanisms regulating diversity, including invader impacts, can vary within the same plant community depending on environmental context. Because limits on native plant recruitment are environmentally contingent, management strategies that seek to increase diversity, including invader eradication, must account for site-level variations in the balance between biotic and abiotic constraints.
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 | 0.001 | 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".