MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Community genetics: resource addition has opposing effects on genetic and species diversity in a 150‐year experiment

2009· article· en· W2160655000 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Silvertown, Pamela Biss, Joanna R. Freeland

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsBiologySpecies richnessGenetic diversityEcologyEcological nicheNicheBiodiversityInterspecific competitionGamma diversitySpecies diversityAlpha diversityPopulationHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used the Park Grass Experiment, begun in 1856, to test alternative hypotheses about the relationship between genetic diversity and plant species diversity. The niche variation hypothesis predicts that populations with few interspecific competitors and hence broader niches are expected to contain greater genetic diversity. The coexistence hypothesis predicts that genetic diversity within species favours coexistence among species and therefore species and genetic diversity should be positively correlated. Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism (AFLP) markers were used to measure the genetic diversity of populations of Anthoxanthum odoratum growing in 10 plots of differing species richness that lie along resource and soil pH gradients. Genetic diversity in A. odoratum was positively correlated with the number of resources added to a plot, but not correlated with species richness. However, separate analyses have shown a negative correlation between resource addition and species richness at Park Grass and elsewhere, so genetic and species diversity appear to respond in opposite directions.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.149 · 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

Citations67
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207