Spread of <i>Bambusa bambos</i> (L.) Voss influences litter‐dwelling arthropod communities in native forests: a case study from Sri Lanka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Both native and non‐native bamboo populations can expand their distributions in a rather irregular manner, inflicting changes in native vegetation with potential consequences for litter‐dwelling arthropod communities. To our knowledge, no studies have been undertaken to explore the impacts of bamboo spread on litter‐dwelling arthropods. This study examined the impacts of Bambusa bambos , a spreading native bamboo species, on abundance and order richness of litter‐dwelling arthropods in tropical moist evergreen forests. Bamboo‐rich and non‐bamboo forests were compared in three study sites at Moragahakanda in the Central Province of Sri Lanka. Arthropods were sampled from leaf litter and individuals were categorised into their respective orders. Arthropod abundance and order richness were higher in bamboo‐rich forests than in non‐bamboo forests across all sites, indicating more hospitable micro‐habitat conditions following bamboo spread. Litter‐dwelling arthropods belonging to orders Blattodea, Hymenoptera, Diptera, Lepidoptera and Orthoptera were either more prevalent or more frequently associated with bamboo‐rich forests than non‐bamboo forests, suggesting a potential shift in community structure. The abundance and order richness of litter‐dwelling arthropods in non‐bamboo forests was explained by environmental variables, whilst no such associations were observed in bamboo‐rich forests. The overall findings indicate that the spread of bamboo may facilitate litter‐dwelling arthropods and cause a compositional shift in taxonomic assemblages, perhaps as a result of changes in the micro‐habitat conditions on the forest floor.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".