The effects of human‐altered habitat spatial pattern on frugivory and seed dispersal: a global meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seed dispersal by frugivorous animals is important for plant mobility, regeneration and persistence. Human‐caused landscape change is thought to disrupt seed dispersal, but evidence is scarce. We performed a comprehensive meta‐analysis on the effects of habitat spatial pattern on frugivory and seed dispersal. We found 233 effects from 71 studies. At a patch or local scale, altered habitat spatial pattern was measured as declining patch size, increasing patch isolation or habitat edge (versus interior). At a landscape scale it was measured as declining amount of habitat, increasing mean patch isolation, increasing number of patches or increasing habitat edge in the landscape. We found overall negative effects of altered habitat spatial pattern on: 1) the quantity of frugivory or seed dispersal, 2) the number of species involved in a plant–frugivore interaction and 3) seed dispersal distance. Moderator variable analysis was only possible for the first of these. It revealed negative responses of the quantity of frugivory or seed dispersal to habitat loss at both the local scale (declining patch size), and the landscape scale (declining habitat amount), but little evidence for a response to habitat edge at either scale. In addition, altered habitat spatial pattern reduced the quantity of frugivory or seed dispersal more strongly in temperate than tropical areas. Finally, the few‐recorded effects of landscape‐scale fragmentation per se (increasing patch density or edge density) on the quantity of frugivory or seed dispersal were mixed and weak. Our meta‐analysis reinforces the notion that habitat loss is a major threat to frugivory and seed dispersal by animals, and reveals an insufficiency of studies of the effects of habitat fragmentation per se. Thus, based on the current literature, we conclude that maintaining and increasing habitat amount is vital for maintaining seed dispersal by frugivorous animals.
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".