MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161186718 · doi:10.2980/16-4-3290

Intense seed predation by harvester ants on a rare mustard

2009· article· en· W2161186718 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joshua P. White, Ian C. Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPredationPopulationSeed predationEndangered speciesBotanyHorticultureEcologySeed dispersalHabitatBiological dispersal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seed predation can significantly restrict the reproductive output and fitness of individual plants, and its population-level consequences may be most severe for plants that are rare or endangered. The Owyhee harvester ant, Pogonomyrmex salinus, actively removes the fruits and seeds of slickspot peppergrass, Lepidium papilliferum, a rare mustard endemic to Idaho. We conducted a field study to investigate the extent to which P. salinus contributes to seed loss in L. papilliferum. On average, individual L. papilliferum exposed to P. salinus experienced a direct loss of > 40% of their mature fruits, whereas plants shielded from ants suffered almost no fruit loss. More than 90% of L. papilliferum seeds placed on the ground beneath plants were scavenged by ants. All L. papilliferum fruits and seeds collected by P salinus were returned to the ants' nests and transported below ground. A search of 30 middens revealed large quantities of empty L. papilliferum fruit husks, but no intact seeds. Thus, it does not appear that the ants benefit L. papilliferum by dispersing the plant's seeds. No seed predation was detected on plants located > 20 m from a P salinus colony. We conclude that P. salinus is the main seed predator of L. papilliferum and that in many cases the ants remove and destroy almost all of an individual plant's seeds. Seed removal of this magnitude suggests that P. salinus may significantly limit recruitment of L. papilliferum, which could lead to further decline of this rare species.

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 score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207