Effects of an invasive herbivore at the single plant scale do not extend to population-scale seedling dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A complex of nine invasive weevils has established in the northern hardwood forests of the Great Lakes Region. These weevils have become the numerically dominant arthropod fauna in the lower vegetation strata of this ecosystem. Effects of these folivorous adults and rhizophagous larvae on seedling survival and density are unknown. We measured the impact of adult weevil defoliation on individual sugar maple (Acer saccharum Marshall) seedlings, the numerically dominant flora in these stands. Over 14 500 seedlings were measured to examine the effects of larval abundance, adult abundance, and adult defoliation on seedling dynamics during 2005–2009. Heavy defoliation led to individual sugar maple seedling mortality. However, at the stand level there was no measureable net effect of invasive weevils against the high natural background rates of seedling mortality. Seedling growth and biomass were reduced by high adult or larval populations, which were associated with heavy leaf and root herbivory, but not by moderate adult or larval populations. We conclude that high levels of redundancy and compensatory processes in this environment allow sugar maple seedling populations to tolerate high levels of weevil damage, although additional stresses could reduce this resilience.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".