Defoliation-induced changes in foliage quality may trigger broad-scale insect outbreaks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Top-down effects, like predation, are drivers of insect outbreaks, but bottom-up effects, like host nutritional quality, also influence outbreaks and could in turn be altered by insect-caused defoliation. We evaluated the prediction that herbivory leads to a positive feedback on outbreak severity as nutrient concentration in plant tissues increases through improved soil nutrient availability from frass and litter deposition. Over seven years of a spruce budworm outbreak, we quantified litter nutrient fluxes, soil nitrogen availability, and host tree foliar nutrient status along a forest susceptibility gradient. As the outbreak progressed, both soil nutrient fluxes and availability increased which, in turn, improved foliage quality in surviving host trees. This is consistent with boosted insect fitness and increased population density and defoliation as outbreaks grow. Our results suggest that a positive bottom-up feedback to forest ecosystems from defoliation may result in conditions favorable to self-amplifying population dynamics in insect herbivores that can contribute to driving broad-scale outbreaks.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".