Effects of urbanization on specialist insect communities of milkweed are mediated by spatial and temporal variation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Urbanization drastically alters landscapes in ways that can threaten local biodiversity. Although species loss has been well documented in urban habitats, why some species persist and not others, and how species interactions change remain poorly understood, especially for species with specialized niche requirements. Here, we test the hypothesis that urbanization disrupts specialized plant–herbivore interactions, and these effects vary according to the characteristics of both cities and the features of the organisms themselves. To test this hypothesis, we surveyed milkweed specialist herbivore communities in the early and late growing season of the common milkweed ( Asclepias syriaca ) across six cities that varied in size by two orders of magnitude. Four results are most important to answering our research questions: (1) the abundance of herbivore species was higher in urban than in rural habitats, whereas leaf herbivory was higher in rural than in urban habitats, and these effects varied between seasons and among cities; (2) the higher species diversity and abundance are likely due to a few species being more associated with rural habitats and other species more common in urban habitats, and thus, urbanization alters insect community composition; (3) the species with the lowest dispersal abilities, Rhyssomatus lineaticollis and Liriomyza asclepiadis , were those that were most strongly affected by urbanization, with R. lineaticollis less abundant and L. asclepiadis more abundant in urban areas; and (4) urbanization influenced plant–herbivore interactions by reducing herbivory, but it did not alter species interactions among herbivorous insects. Biodiversity loss, particularly declines of habitat and host specialists, in urban areas remains a critical concern for conservation. Our results indicate that at least some specialist herbivores are more abundant in urban areas than in rural areas and that species interactions remain intact.
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".