MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2203765963 · doi:10.26786/1920-7603(2011)8

Resource abundance and distribution drive bee visitation within developing tropical urban landscapes

2011· article· en· W2203765963 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pollination Ecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingGeneralist and specialist speciesGuildAbundance (ecology)EcologyBiologyHabitatSpecies richnessBiological dispersalGeographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban landscapes include a mix of biotic and anthropogenic elements that can interact with and influence species occurrence and behaviour. In order to outline the drivers of bee (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) occurrence in tropical urban landscapes, foraging patterns and community characteristics were examined at a common and broadly attractive food resource, Tecoma stans (Bignoniaceae). Bee visitation was monitored at 120 individual resources in three cities from June 2007 to March 2009. Resource characteristics, spatial distribution, and other local and regional landscape variables were assessed and then used to develop descriptive regression models of forager visitation. The results indicated that increased bee abundance and taxon richness consistently correlated with increased floral abundance. Resource distribution was also influential, with more spatially aggregated resources receiving more foragers. Individual bee guilds had differential responses to the variables tested, but the significant impact of increased floral abundance was generally conserved. Smaller bodied bee species responded to floral abundance, resource structure, and proximity to natural habitats, suggesting that size-related dispersal abilities structure occurrence patterns in this guild. Larger bees favoured spatially aggregated resources in addition to increased floral abundance, suggesting an optimization of foraging energetics. The impact of the urban matrix was minimal and was only seen in generalist feeders (African honey bees). The strongly resource-driven foraging dynamics described in this study can be used to inform conservation and management practices in urban landscapes. download Appendix

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.

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 score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.185 · 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