MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2737846237 · doi:10.1111/gcb.13832

Defaunation leads to interaction deficits, not interaction compensation, in an island seed dispersal network

2017· article· en· W2737846237 on OpenAlexaff
Evan C. Fricke, Joshua J. Tewksbury, Haldre S. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Change Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsFuture Earth
FundersUniversity of WashingtonNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDefaunationMutualism (biology)BiologyEcologyFrugivoreBiological dispersalSeed dispersalBiodiversityEcosystemInteraction networkPollinationPopulationHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following defaunation, the loss of interactions with mutualists such as pollinators or seed dispersers may be compensated through increased interactions with remaining mutualists, ameliorating the negative cascading impacts on biodiversity. Alternatively, remaining mutualists may respond to altered competition by reducing the breadth or intensity of their interactions, exacerbating negative impacts on biodiversity. Despite the importance of these responses for our understanding of the dynamics of mutualistic networks and their response to global change, the mechanism and magnitude of interaction compensation within real mutualistic networks remains largely unknown. We examined differences in mutualistic interactions between frugivores and fruiting plants in two island ecosystems possessing an intact or disrupted seed dispersal network. We determined how changes in the abundance and behavior of remaining seed dispersers either increased mutualistic interactions (contributing to "interaction compensation") or decreased interactions (causing an "interaction deficit") in the disrupted network. We found a "rich-get-richer" response in the disrupted network, where remaining frugivores favored the plant species with highest interaction frequency, a dynamic that worsened the interaction deficit among plant species with low interaction frequency. Only one of five plant species experienced compensation and the other four had significant interaction deficits, with interaction frequencies 56-95% lower in the disrupted network. These results do not provide support for the strong compensating mechanisms assumed in theoretical network models, suggesting that existing network models underestimate the prevalence of cascading mutualism disruption after defaunation. This work supports a mutualist biodiversity-ecosystem functioning relationship, highlighting the importance of mutualist diversity for sustaining diverse and resilient 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations42
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Change BiologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207