Frugivore distributions are associated with plant dispersal syndrome diversity in the Caribbean archipelagos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim Many plants rely on interactions with frugivores for dispersal, suggesting that animal communities may affect plant occupancy and diversity. However, the contribution of these interaction‐led biotic variables on plant diversity is poorly understood, especially in archipelagic hotspots such as the Caribbean. In island ecosystems, biogeographic theories suggest that island configurations drive colonization‐extinction dynamics, while macroecology argues for the importance of climatic drivers of biodiversity. Within this context, we examine how frugivore‐driven biotic factors are associated with fruiting plant species richness in relation to abiotic (climatic and geologic) and island configuration characteristics. Location Caribbean archipelagos. Methods We compiled a review of the diversity and distributions of 6039 plants and 326 vertebrate frugivores across 105 islands within the Caribbean. We then identified characteristics related to plant‐frugivore interactions and assigned each species as having either abiotic (wind, water, etc.) or zoochoric (frugivory‐dependent) dispersal syndromes. We related plant richness and dispersal syndromes to the regional diversity and characteristics of frugivorous animals, abiotic environments and island configuration characteristics through stepwise multivariate regression with generalized linear models and model selection. Results We found that 44.6% of Caribbean plants are dispersed through frugivory (endozoochory). Frugivore‐related characteristics, namely accumulated body mass of island bird assemblages, were the best predictors of the diversity of seed dispersal syndromes. To a lesser degree, reptile richness and soil variety were also considered important predictors for zoochoric plant distribution, while island areas affected abiotically‐dispersed plants. Main conclusion We found that biotic characteristics of frugivore communities are important predictors of plant diversity in the Caribbean archipelagos. However, this may also be influenced by climate and colonization history. Given the importance of biotic metrics in explaining plant diversity, we suggest that fruit‐frugivore interactions are important components of island biogeography and that frugivorous communities should be accounted for plant biodiversity predictions and forecast models.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".