MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754339490 · doi:10.1111/ele.12828

Shifts of community composition and population density substantially affect ecosystem function despite invariant richness

2017· letter· en· W2754339490 on OpenAlexafffund
Jürg W. Spaak, Jan M. Baert, Donald J. Baird, Nico Eisenhauer, Lorraine Maltby, Francesco Pomati, Viktoriia Radchuk, Jason R. Rohr, Paul J. Van den Brink, Frederik De Laender

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersFogarty International CenterNational Institute of General Medical SciencesUniversité de NamurU.S. Department of AgricultureNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRSVlaamse regeringDeutsches Zentrum für integrative Biodiversitätsforschung Halle-Jena-LeipzigFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Institutes of HealthSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSpecies richnessEcosystemEcologyEnvironmental changePopulationEnvironmental scienceClimate changeGeographyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been considerable focus on the impacts of environmental change on ecosystem function arising from changes in species richness. However, environmental change may affect ecosystem function without affecting richness, most notably by affecting population densities and community composition. Using a theoretical model, we find that, despite invariant richness, (1) small environmental effects may already lead to a collapse of function; (2) competitive strength may be a less important determinant of ecosystem function change than the selectivity of the environmental change driver and (3) effects on ecosystem function increase when effects on composition are larger. We also present a complementary statistical analysis of 13 data sets of phytoplankton and periphyton communities exposed to chemical stressors and show that effects on primary production under invariant richness ranged from -75% to +10%. We conclude that environmental protection goals relying on measures of richness could underestimate ecological impacts of environmental change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations108
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207