MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2575093316 · doi:10.1111/btp.12348

When invasion may not be harmful: niche relations in a lizard assemblage

2017· article· en· W2575093316 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gisele Regina Winck, Marlon Almeida‐Santos, Thiago Arnt Dorigo, Felipe B. Telles, Carlos Frederico Duarte Rocha

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotropica · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCanadian Foundation for Dietetic Research
KeywordsLizardEcologyNicheAbundance (ecology)Species richnessBiologyNiche differentiationNiche segregationSympatric speciationSquamataEcological nicheGekkonidaeFaunaArboreal locomotionHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Some studies have suggested that non‐native species invasions may threaten local diversity by creating homogenized environments. However, many studies have been based on limited or anecdotal data, and/or have failed to consider the influence of habitat modification together with possible influences of non‐native species on native ones. Hemidactylus mabouia (Squamata, Gekkonidae) likely invaded natural environments in Brazil hundreds of years ago. Yet, little is known about whether it affects native lizard fauna. We tested whether H. mabouia negatively influences native lizard species richness and abundance on a regional scale and locally through niche overlap. We analyzed species abundance and richness of nine lizard assemblages, in five of which H. mabouia occurred. We evaluated niche overlap of species in a lizard assemblage with high H. mabouia abundance through null models. Niche axes included spatial use, temporal activity and diet. Although species abundance did not differ among sites with and without the invasive species, the presence of H. mabouia seems constrained to the richer assemblages sampled. We observed significantly higher niche overlap in spatial (ɸ obs = 0.63; ɸ exp = 0.37; P obs ≥ P exp = 0.0002) and trophic axes (ɸ obs = 0.46; ɸ exp = 0.17; P obs ≥ P exp < 0.001), but not in activity. When we considered all axes (three‐dimensional niche), there was no overlapping among the lizard species. Our findings did not support the hypothesis that this non‐native species negatively influences other sympatric lizard 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0400.003

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.216 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotropicaSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207