Urbanization Shapes the Ecology and Evolution of Plant-Arthropod Herbivore Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urbanization is quickly changing natural and agricultural landscapes, with consequences for the herbivorous arthropods dwelling in or near cities. Here, we review the evidence for the effects of urbanization on the ecology and evolution of plant-herbivore interactions. We first summarize how abiotic factors associated with urbanization affect the ecology and evolution of herbivorous arthropods. Next, we explore how urbanization affects plant-herbivore interactions, by considering how urban environments may disrupt top-down and bottom-up ecological processes that affect herbivory. Abiotic changes in the urban environment, such as the urban heat island effect, have caused shifts in phenology for some herbivorous arthropods. Other abiotic changes in urban areas, including water availability, pollution, and habitat fragmentation, have resulted in changes to physiology, behavior, and population abundance. Native species richness tends to decline in urban areas, however, changes in abundance appear to be species specific. These shifts in ecology suggest that urbanization could affect both adaptive and non-adaptive evolution of herbivorous arthropods and their host plants in urban environments. However, plant-herbivore interactions may be dramatically altered if either arthropods or plants are unable to tolerate urban environments. Thus, while some species can physiologically acclimate or genetically adapt to the abiotic urban environment, the biotic interactions may cause many species to decline. We conclude with suggestions for future research to advance our understanding of how urbanization alters the ecology and evolution of plant-herbivore interactions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".