Constraints on the functional trait space of aquatic invertebrates in bromeliads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Functional traits are commonly used in predictive models that link environmental drivers and community structure to ecosystem functioning. A prerequisite is to identify robust sets of continuous axes of trait variation, and to understand the ecological and evolutionary constraints that result in the functional trait space occupied by interacting species. Despite their diversity and role in ecosystem functioning, little is known of the constraints on the functional trait space of invertebrate biotas of entire biogeographic regions. We examined the ecological strategies and constraints underlying the realized trait space of aquatic invertebrates, using data on 12 functional traits of 852 taxa collected in tank bromeliads from Mexico to Argentina. Principal Component Analysis was used to reduce trait dimensionality to significant axes of trait variation, and the proportion of potential trait space that is actually occupied by all taxa was compared to null model expectations. Permutational Analyses of Variance were used to test whether trait combinations were clade‐dependent. The major axes of trait variation represented life‐history strategies optimizing resource use and antipredator adaptations. There was evidence for trophic, habitat, defence and life‐history niche axes. Bromeliad invertebrates only occupied 16%–23% of the potential space within these dimensions, due to greater concentrations than predicted under uniform or normal distributions. Thus, despite high taxonomic diversity, invertebrates only utilized a small number of successful ecological strategies. Empty areas in trait space represented gaps between major phyla that arose from biological innovations, and trait combinations that are unviable in the bromeliad ecosystem. Only a few phylogenetically distant genera were neighbouring in trait space. Trait combinations aggregated taxa by family and then by order, suggesting that niche conservatism was a widespread mechanism in the diversification of ecological strategies. A plain language summary is available for this article.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".