MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901209872 · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.13099

Rare and phylogenetically distinct plant species exhibit less diverse root‐associated pathogen communities

2018· article· en· W2901209872 on OpenAlexafffund
Yongjian Chen, Pu Jia, Marc W. Cadotte, Pandeng Wang, Xiang Liu, Yan-Ling Qi, Xiaomin Jiang, Zihui Wang, Wensheng Shu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSpecies richnessBiologyPhylogenetic treeEcologyPhylogeneticsPlant communityPhylogenetic diversityAbundance (ecology)Botany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One of the central questions in ecology is why some species are abundant while others are rare. In plant communities, some studies show that rare plant species are rare because they suffer stronger negative density‐dependent effects from pathogens compared to abundant plant species. Moreover, such pathogen effects are also suggested to be related to phylogenetic distance among plant species. However, the importance of pathogens has been commonly inferred by treating the entire pathogen community as a “black box” without explicitly characterizing pathogen richness and community composition. Here, we test two predictions. First, if rare plant species are more susceptible to pathogens, we predict that rare plant species are associated with a higher richness of specialists (i.e., pathogens that attack only a single plant species) and/or the total pathogen community. If phylogenetically distinct plant species are less susceptible to pathogens, we predict that plant species with higher phylogenetic distinctiveness (i.e., a measure of how phylogenetically distant a species is from other co‐occurring species) are associated with a lower richness of phylogenetic specialists (i.e., pathogens that attack closely related plant species) and/or the total pathogen community. We conducted a survey of the root‐associated pathogen communities from 45 plant species in a subtropical forest. We showed that approximately 40% and 25% of the pathogens were specialists and phylogenetic specialists respectively. In contrast to our first prediction, the richness of the total pathogen community but not the richness of the specialists was found to be positively related to plant species abundance, indicating that rare plant species suffer less from pathogens. Consistent with our second prediction, both the richness of the phylogenetic specialists and the total pathogen community were found to be negatively related to plant species phylogenetic distinctiveness. Furthermore, these correlations were stronger at the earlier plant life stages examined. Synthesis. We found that the root‐associated pathogen communities were less diverse in rare plant species and plant species with few close relatives. These associations varied across multiple plant life stages, suggesting that the strength of the above‐ground–below‐ground interactions change dynamically across plant life span.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.144 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207