Food‐web structure of willow‐galling sawflies and their natural enemies across Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Communities consist of species and their interactions. They can thus be described as networks, with species as nodes and interactions as links. Within such networks, the diversity of nodes and the distribution of links may affect patterns of energy transfer between trophic levels, the dynamics of the system, and the outcome in terms of ecosystem functioning. To date, most descriptions of networks have focused on single or relatively few sites, and have oftentimes been built on poorly resolved nodes and links. Yet, comparisons of local interaction networks reveal variation in space and in time, thus spurring interest in methods and theory for understanding patterns, drivers, and consequences of this variation. Progress in this field relies on access to replicate samples of comparable food webs across large spatiotemporal scales, resolved to species rather than to compound nodes. Due to the massive efforts required, high-quality data sets are still scarce. We created a data set on a single community type sampled across Europe: willow species (Salix), willow-galling sawflies (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae: Nematinae: Euurina), and their natural enemies (hymenopteran parasitoids and coleopteran, lepidopteran, dipteran, and hymenopteran inquilines). Each sample was referenced in space and time, and each node resolved with the highest possible resolution, including taxonomic affinity, gall type (for herbivores), and mode of parasitism (for natural enemies). Galler survival and link structure were resolved by dissection and rearing of gall inhabitants. In total, the data set is based on 641 site visits over 29 years, and on 165,424 galls representing 96 herbivore nodes and 52 plant nodes. The dissections and rearings yielded 42,129 natural enemies belonging to 126 species, and revealed 1,173 different links. The spatiotemporal and taxonomic resolution of these data make them amenable to analyses of both ecological and evolutionary processes of network assembly. Thus, this data set will facilitate testing of important hypotheses in recent community theory, concerning, e.g., the sampling effort needed to adequately describe interaction structure within ecological communities, the impact of environmental conditions and biotic filters on the distribution of species and their interactions, and the relationship between the global "metaweb" and its local realizations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".