Invasive Canadian goldenrod (Solidago canadensis L.) as a preferred foraging habitat for spiders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Invasions of alien species are a great threat to biodiversity and native species communities. There are many examples in the literature on how the invasive plants affect the natural environment. Beside reports on negative effects of these invasions, there are also several studies indicating a positive impact of the invaders. Canadian goldenrod ( Solidago canadensis ) is one of the most invasive plant species all over Europe. Earlier studies showed that the goldenrod affects natural plant communities and has a negative impact on many animals, both vertebrates and arthropods. However, all the studies were conducted during goldenrod flowering. In contrast, this study has tested the novel hypothesis that Canadian goldenrod has a positive effect on native spider hunting success and increases spider abundance in farmland outside the growing season. Observations were made during spring on 13 meadows: 7 invaded and 6 non-invaded by goldenrod. All tall plants from experimental plots (1 m 2 each) were examined for the presence of spiders, their nets and prey. Prey items were counted only in spider webs. The results support the hypothesis that S. canadensis is a favourable foraging habitat for spiders: 14.6 spiders/m 2 on invaded plots versus 2.2 on non-invaded ones. Many spiders of the families Theridiidae and Araneidae were found on goldenrod plants, but on native plants only the Araneidae were found. Moreover, on invaded plots, much more prey items/m 2 were present in spiders webs than on non-invaded plots (155.3 vs. 13.8). The study is a rare example of a positive influence of invasive plants on the native arthropod community. This is also a novel approach that shows the importance of dry goldenrod stems in invaded 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".