MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160002701 · doi:10.1890/11-0275.1

Climate, habitat, and species interactions at different scales determine the structure of a Neotropical bat community

2011· article· en· W2160002701 on OpenAlexafffund
Sergio Estrada‐Villegas, Brian J. McGill, Elisabeth K. V. Kalko

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsSpecies richnessEcologyHabitatAbundance (ecology)Community structureBreeding bird surveySpatial ecologySpatial heterogeneitySpatial variabilityCommunityBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate, habitat, and species interactions are factors that control community properties (e.g., species richness, abundance) across various spatial scales. Usually, researchers study how a few properties are affected by one factor in isolation and at one scale. Hence, there are few multi-scale studies testing how multiple controlling factors simultaneously affect community properties at different scales. We ask whether climate, habitat structure, or insect resources at each of three spatial scales explains most of the variation in six community properties and which theory best explains the distribution of selected community properties across a rainfall gradient. We studied a Neotropical insectivorous bat ensemble in the Isthmus of Panama with acoustic monitoring techniques. Using climatological data, habitat surveys, and insect captures in a hierarchical sampling design we determined how much variation of the community properties was explained by the three factors employing two approaches for variance partitioning. Our results revealed that most of the variation in species richness, total abundance, and feeding activity occurred at the smallest spatial scale and was explained by habitat structure. In contrast, climate at large scales explained most of the variation in individual species' abundances. Although each species had an idiosyncratic response to the gradient, species richness peaked at intermediate levels of precipitation, whereas total abundance was very similar across sites, suggesting density compensation. All community properties responded in a different manner to the factor and scale under consideration.

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 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 score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207