MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896785935 · doi:10.1111/geb.12822

Phylogenetic homogenization of bee communities across ecoregions

2018· article· en· W2896785935 on OpenAlexaff
Tina Harrison, Jason Gibbs, Rachael Winfree

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcoregionPhylogenetic treeBiodiversityBeta diversityPhylogenetic diversityEcologyGeographyHomogenization (climate)BiologyTaxonBiodiversity hotspotGlobal biodiversity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Land use change reorganizes local communities, resulting in complex changes in biodiversity at larger scales. The biotic homogenization hypothesis predicts that the replacement of sensitive loser species with widespread winner species will lead to loss of beta diversity and ultimately loss of regional diversity at multiple levels of ecological organization. We ask if land use is associated with biotic homogenization patterns in bee communities at two large spatial scales, using both species and phylogenetic dissimilarity indices. Location North‐eastern USA (New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania). Time period 2013–2015. Major taxa studied Superfamily Apoidea (bees). Methods We sampled bee communities from replicated sites in forest, agriculture and urban land use types within a large spatial extent spanning four distinct ecoregions. We compared pairwise compositional dissimilarity within and between ecoregions, using both species and phylogenetic dissimilarity indices. We also investigated how compositional difference is related to geographic distance between sites. Results Forested, agricultural and urban landscapes did not differ detectably in either mean pairwise species dissimilarity or slope of distance‐decay. Dissimilarity among both agricultural and urban bee communities increased with geographic distance. However, urban landscapes had significantly lower phylogenetic pairwise dissimilarity, indicating strong phylogenetic homogenization at within‐ and between‐ecoregion scales. Main conclusions We did not detect bee species homogenization in agricultural or urban land use types. However, urban land use was associated with phylogenetic homogenization across a large regional extent. Urban bee communities are dominated by closely related species that maintain beta diversity at the species level, but contribute to low phylogenetic beta diversity relative to forest and agricultural bee communities. We observed similar levels of homogenization at landscape and regional spatial extents, despite inter‐site distances differing by an order of magnitude between these scales. Further urbanization could result in loss of bee biodiversity and evolutionary history at multiple spatial scales.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations34
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and BiogeographySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207