Functional niche occupation and species richness in herbaceous plant communities along experimental gradients of stress and disturbance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The patterns of niche occupation in functional trait space have been widely studied to understand the processes of community assembly, but are rarely linked to environmental conditions (here, stress and disturbance). In this study, we investigate (1) how the pattern of functional niche occupation, incorporating intraspecific trait variation and covariation, varies along experimental gradients of stress and disturbance, (2) whether habitat filtering and/or limiting similarity modify the pattern, and (3) whether their strength varies as a function of species richness or levels of stress and disturbance. METHODS: We constructed an experimental system consisting of 24 herbaceous plant mesocosms under different levels of stress and disturbance, and measured ten traits on five individuals for each species in each mesocosm. We quantified the total functional niche volume occupied by an entire mesocosm, the functional niche overlap among species within a mesocosm and the average functional niche volume occupied per species, and investigated how these metrics varied from species-poor to species-rich mesocosms along gradients of stress and disturbance. KEY RESULTS: Species richness and functional niche overlap correlated positively to disturbance at low and medium levels of stress, but peaked at the intermediate level of disturbance when stress was high. The total functional niche volume and average functional niche volume did not change significantly along these gradients. Compared to null models, each mesocosm occupied a smaller total functional niche volume (habitat filtering) and the species within each mesocosm overlapped less and were more functionally specialized (limiting similarity). Moreover, the standardized metrics (to the null expectations) did not change significantly under different levels of stress and disturbance. CONCLUSIONS: This experimental evidence shows that both habitat filtering and limiting similarity determine the patterns of functional niche occupation and species richness, but their strength does not change along environmental gradients of stress and disturbance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".