MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288369501 · doi:10.7717/peerj.1740

Increasing land use drives changes in plant phylogenetic diversity and prevalence of specialists

2016· article· en· W2288369501 on OpenAlexaff
Soraya Villalobos, Jana C. Vamosi

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecies richnessBiodiversityEcologyPhylogenetic diversityBiologySpecies diversityEcosystemGrazingTraitPlant communityPhylogenetic tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased human land use has resulted in the increased homogenization of biodiversity between sites, yet we lack sufficient indicators to predict which species decline and the consequence of their potential loss on ecosystem services. We used comparative phylogenetic analysis to (1) characterize how increasing conversion of forest and grasslands to grazing pasturelands changes plant diversity and composition; (2) examine how changes in land use relate to declines in functional trait diversity; and (3) specifically investigate how these changes in plant composition affect the prevalence of zygomorphy and the possible consequences that these changes may have on pollinator functional groups. As predicted, we found that the conversion to grazing pasturelands negatively impacted species richness and phylogenetic composition. Clades with significantly more represented taxa in grasslands (GL) were genera with a high representation of agricultural weeds, while the composition was biased towards clades of subalpine herbaceous wildflowers in Mixed Forest (MF). Changes in community composition and structure had strong effects on the prevalence of zygomorphic species likely driven by nitrogen-fixing abilities of certain clades with zygomorphic flowers (e.g., Fabaceae). Land conversion can thus have unexpected impacts on trait distributions relevant for the functioning of the community in other capacities (e.g., cascading effects to other trophic levels (i.e., pollinators). Finally, the combination of traits represented by the current composition of species in GL and MF might enhance the diagnostic value of productivity and ecosystem processes in the most eroded ecosystems.

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 score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.140 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207