Forest edges and their effects on the arrival of dragonflies at north-temperate experimental ponds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The matrix, an environment in the landscape that individuals move through but do not reside in, can affect species dispersal and the arrival of individuals at habitat patches. Elements around this matrix that provide refuge or resources may shape the arrival of animals at habitat patches, even when those patches are equivalent in quality. Adult dragonflies (Odonata: Anisoptera) frequently use open terrestrial environments during movement and dispersal in north-temperate regions; however, they can also roost along forest edges. Because of the potential value of forest edges to adult dragonflies, we tested whether pond proximity (i.e., connectivity) to multiple forest edges was positively related to the abundance or diversity of arriving dragonflies. We observed dragonflies arriving at 9 experimental pond sites located within an open field landscape in Ontario, Canada. Experimental ponds differed in their distance to source ponds and to forest edges, a potential refuge for dragonflies. We found no effect of connectivity to forest edges or distance to source ponds on the abundance or diversity of dragonflies arriving at a site. Dragonfly dispersal was therefore not limited at the spatial scale of our study (<305 m to source ponds). In addition, dragonflies did not seem to discriminate among sites based on the amount of nearby forest edge, although all sites within the generally open landscape had at least some forest edge in close proximity (10–79 m). Our results provide greater insight regarding the decisions that dragonflies make in response to landscape elements while dispersing to reproductive habitats.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".