MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metacommunity phylogenetics: separating the roles of environmental filters and historical biogeography

2010· article· en· W2146235510 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew A. Leibold, Evan P. Economo, Pedro R. Peres‐Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetacommunityEcologyBiogeographyBiologyAdaptation (eye)Community structureZooplanktonPhylogenetic treeBiological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biogeographical, evolutionary and ecological processes interact to regulate patterns in metacommunities. However, as there are few quantitative methods for evaluating their joint effects, resolving this interaction is difficult. We develop a method that aims to evaluate the interaction between phylogenetic structure, historical biogeographic events and environmental filtering in driving species distributions in a large-scale metacommunity. Using freshwater zooplankton as a case study, we contrast the phylogenetic metacommunity structure of calanoid copepods and an ecologically similar but more vagile group, daphniids, in the northeastern US. We find that legacies of historical biogeographical events have strongly constrained calanoid distributions within this area, but that adaptation to different water chemistry and lake morphology drives the metacommunity structure of daphniids. Our findings show that biogeographic history and metacommunity processes jointly regulate community structure in these lakes and suggest that this also depends on factors that affect the colonization rate of different types of organisms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations237
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207