Climatic suitability ranking of biological control candidates: a biogeographic approach for ragweed management in Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Biological control using natural antagonists has been a most successful management tool against alien invasive plants that threaten biodiversity. The selection of candidate agents remains a critical step in a biocontrol program before more elaborate and time‐consuming experiments are conducted. Here, we propose a biogeographic approach to identify candidates and combinations of candidates to potentially cover a large range of the invader. We studiedAmbrosia artemisiifolia(common ragweed), native to North America (NA) and invasive worldwide, and sixNAbiocontrol candidates for the introduced Europe (EU) range of ragweed, both under current and future bioclimatic conditions. For the first time, we constructed species distribution models based on worldwide occurrences and important bioclimatic variables simultaneously for a plant invader and its biocontrol candidates in view of selecting candidates that potentially cover a large range of the target invader. Ordination techniques were used to explore climatic constraints of each species and to perform niche overlap tests with ragweed. We show a large overlap in climatic space between candidates and ragweed, but a considerable discrepancy in geographic range overlap betweenEU(31.4%) andNA(83.3%). This might be due to niche unfilling and expansion of ragweed inEUand the fact that habitats with high ragweed occurrences inEUare rare inNAand predicted to be unsuitable for the candidates. Total geographic range of all candidates combined is expected to decrease under climate change in both ranges, but they will respond differently. The relative geographic coverage of a plant invader by biocontrol candidates at home is largely transferable to the introduced range, even when the invader shifts its niche. Our analyses also identified which combination of candidates is expected to cover the most area and for which abiotic conditions to select in order to develop climatically adapted strains for particular regions, where ragweed is currently unlikely to be controlled.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".