Museum specimens provide novel insights into changing plant–herbivore interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mounting evidence shows that species interactions may mediate how individual species respond to climate change. However, long-term anthropogenic effects on species interactions are poorly characterized owing to a lack of data. Insect herbivory is a major ecological process that represents the interaction between insect herbivores and their host plants, but historical data on insect damage to plants is particularly sparse. Here, we suggest that museum collections of insects and plants can fill key gaps in our knowledge on changing trophic interactions, including proximate mechanisms and the net outcomes of multiple global change drivers across diverse insect herbivore-plant associations. We outline theory on how global change may affect herbivores and their host plants and highlight the unique data that could be extracted from museum specimens to explore their shifting interactions. We aim to provide a framework for using museum specimens to explore how some of the most diverse co-evolved relationships are responding to climate and land use change.This article is part of the theme issue 'Biological collections for understanding biodiversity in the Anthropocene'.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".