MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047142210 · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.13310

Interactions between seed‐dispersing ant species affect plant community composition in field mesocosms

2020· article· en· W3047142210 on OpenAlexafffund
Kirsten M. Prior, Shannon A. Meadley‐Dunphy, Megan E. Frederickson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoUniversity of TorontoOntario Ministry of Economic Development and Innovation
KeywordsInterspecific competitionSeed dispersalMutualism (biology)BiologySeed dispersal syndromeBiological dispersalIntraspecific competitionMesocosmEcologyCompetition (biology)SeedlingANTEcosystemBotanyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In generalized mutualisms, species vary in the quality of services they provide to their partners directly via traits that affect partner fitness and indirectly via traits that influence interactions among mutualist species that play similar functional roles. Myrmecochory, or seed dispersal by ants, is a generalized mutualism with ant species varying in the quality of dispersal services they provide to their plant partners. Variation in ant species identity can directly impact seed dispersal patterns and plant community composition; however, we know less about how interactions among seed-dispersing ant species indirectly influence plant partners. The invasive ant Myrmica rubra, is a high-quality seed-disperser in its native range that interacts with myrmecochores (ant-dispersed plants) and the high-quality seed disperser Aphaenogaster sp. in its invaded range. We use this system to examine how interactions between two functionally similar mutualist ant species influence the recruitment and community composition of ant-dispersed plants. We performed a field mesocosm experiment and a laboratory behavioural experiment to compare discovery and dominance behaviours between ant species, and seed dispersal and seedling recruitment of four myrmecochore species among intraspecific interaction treatments of each ant species and an interspecific interaction treatment. We found that M. rubra was better at discovering and dispersing seeds, but Aphaenogaster sp. was dominantly aggressive over M. rubra. Interspecific interactions dampened seed dispersal relative to dispersal by the better disperser. Despite this dampening, we found no effect of interspecific interactions on seedling recruitment. However, community composition of seedlings in the interspecific interaction treatment was more similar to composition in the aggressively dominant ant (Aphaenogaster sp.) treatment than in the better discoverer ant M. rubra treatment. We show that interspecific interactions between mutualist species in the same functional guild affect the outcome of mutualistic interactions with partner species. Despite the native ant dispersing fewer seeds, its dominance over the subordinate (invasive) ant has the potential to allow for some level of biotic resistance against the effects of M. rubra on plant communities when these species coexist.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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