Body size affects the spatial scale of habitat–beetle interactions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used abundance data and the program Focus to determine the spatial scale at which 31 species of longhorned beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) respond to forest habitat amount. We predicted that the spatial scale at which species respond would increase with body size, and that species using ephemeral larval habitat would respond at larger spatial scales than species using more stable larval habitat. We found that forest cover was a better measure of the amount of habitat for polyphagous species than for oligophagous species. Larger species of longhorned beetles responded to forest cover at larger scales. We did not find evidence that species using more ephemeral larval habitat conditions responded at larger scales than species developing in more stable habitat conditions. Our results highlight the importance of accurately describing habitat in studies of species–environment relationships. While scales of response may be species‐specific, some generalizations across species are possible.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it