MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The variation of tree beta diversity across a global network of forest plots

2012· article· en· W2125036344 on OpenAlex
Miquel De Cáceres, Pierre Legendre, Renato Valencia, Min Cao, Li‐Wan Chang, George B. Chuyong, Richard Condit, Zhanqing Hao, Chang‐Fu Hsieh, Stephen P. Hubbell, David Kenfack, Keping Ma, Xiangcheng Mi, Md. Nur Supardi Noor, Abdul Rahman Kassim, Haibao Ren, Sheng‐Hsin Su, I‐Fang Sun, Duncan W. Thomas, Wanhui Ye, Fangliang He

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de Montréal
FundersSmithsonian Tropical Research InstitutePontificia Universidad Católica del EcuadorAndrew W. Mellon Foundation
KeywordsBeta diversitySpecies richnessGamma diversityAlpha diversityEcologyForest plotSpecies diversityBiodiversityNull modelSpatial variabilityRarefaction (ecology)Tree (set theory)Forest inventoryBiologyForest managementMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Aims With the aim of understanding why some of the world's forests exhibit higher tree beta diversity values than others, we asked: (1) what is the contribution of environmentally related variation versus pure spatial and local stochastic variation to tree beta diversity assessed at the forest plot scale; (2) at what resolution are these beta‐diversity components more apparent; and (3) what determines the variation in tree beta diversity observed across regions/continents? Location World‐wide. Methods We compiled an unprecedented data set of 10 large‐scale stem‐mapping forest plots differing in latitude, tree species richness and topographic variability. We assessed the tree beta diversity found within each forest plot separately. The non‐directional variation in tree species composition among cells of the plot was our measure of beta diversity. We compared the beta diversity of each plot with the value expected under a null model. We also apportioned the beta diversity into four components: pure topographic, spatially structured topographic, pure spatial and unexplained. We used linear mixed models to interpret the variation of beta diversity values across the plots. Results Total tree beta diversity within a forest plot decreased with increasing cell size, and increased with tree species richness and the amount of topographic variability of the plot. The topography‐related component of beta diversity was correlated with the amount of topographic variability but was unrelated to its species richness. The unexplained variation was correlated with the beta diversity expected under the null model and with species richness. Main conclusions Because different components of beta diversity have different determinants, comparisons of tree beta diversity across regions should quantify not only overall variation in species composition but also its components. Global‐scale patterns in tree beta diversity are largely coupled with changes in gamma richness due to the relationship between the latter and the variation generated by local stochastic assembly processes.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.215 · 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