The role of dispersal in shaping plant community composition of wetlands within an old‐growth forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary 1. Dispersal ability can influence the importance of dispersal relative to other processes organizing metacommunities, such as species sorting among habitats along environmental gradients. 2. We compare plants with different dispersal modes and habitat affinities, evaluating the roles of environmental and spatial controls on plant community composition in 128 wetlands within 10 km 2 of old‐growth maple–beech forest in southern Québec, Canada. 3. We address two hypotheses. First, we ask whether species with short‐distance dispersal mechanisms are more dispersal‐limited than species with adaptations for long‐distance dispersal. Second, because wetland habitats are more fragmented than upland habitats in this forested area, we test the hypothesis that wetland species are more dispersal‐limited than upland species growing in the same wetlands (e.g. on hummocks within a swamp). 4. Variation partitioning based on constrained ordinations showed that the distributions of species with short‐distance dispersal mechanisms related more strongly to spatial factors than the distributions of long‐distance dispersers, supporting the interpretation that these species are more dispersal‐limited. The distributions of short‐distance dispersers also showed finer‐scale spatial patterns than the distributions of long‐distance dispersers. 5. Distributions of wetland species related more strongly to environmental conditions than the distributions of upland species growing in the same wetlands, suggesting that wetland species are actually less dispersal‐limited than upland species. Wetland and upland species had similar patterns of spatial variation in community composition. 6. Synthesis. The processes of dispersal limitation and species sorting along environmental gradients have differential importance to plants that grow within the same communities, but differ in dispersal ability and habitat affinity. This result emphasizes the impact of dispersal ability on the organization of metacommunities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".