Effect of Invasive Plant Species on Temperate Wetland Plant Diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Invasive species are a major threat to global biodiversity and an important cause of biotic homogenization of ecosystems. Exotic plants have been identified as a particular concern because of the widely held belief that they competitively exclude native plant species. We examined the correlation between native and invasive species richness in 58 Ontario inland wetlands. The relationship between exotic and native species richness was positive even when we controlled for important covarying factors. In addition, we examined the relationship between the abundance of four native species ( Typha latifolia, T. angustifolia, Salix petiolaris, Nuphar variegatum ) and four invasive species ( Lythrum salicaria, Hydrocharis morsus‐ranae, Phalaris arundinacea, Rhamnus frangula ) that often dominate temperate wetlands and native and rare native species richness. Exotic species were no more likely to dominate a wetland than native species, and the proportion of dominant exotic species that had a significant negative effect on the native plant community was the same as the proportion of native species with a significant negative effect. We conclude that the key to conservation of inland wetland biodiversity is to discourage the spread of community dominants, regardless of geographical origin.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".