MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295084523 · doi:10.1017/s0007485322000414

Non-target effects of agri-environmental schemes on solitary bees and fungi in the United Kingdom

2022· article· en· W4295084523 on OpenAlexafffund
Katherine Lunn, Tobias Guldberg Frøslev, Madeleine Rhodes, Leah Taylor, Hernani F. M. Oliveira, Catherine E. A. Gresty, Elizabeth L. Clare

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Entomological Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaOntario GenomicsGenome Canada
KeywordsNestednessBiologyPollinatorEcologyBroodForageSpecies richnessPollinationPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) are well-studied, the effects on non-target bee species like solitary bees, in the same environment, are generally lacking. One goal of AES is to alter floral provision and taxonomic composition of plant communities to provide better forage for pollinators, however, this may potentially impact other ecological communities such as fungal diversity associated with plant-bee communities. Fungi are integral in these bee communities as they can impact bee species both beneficially and detrimentally. We test the hypothesis that alteration of the environment through provision of novel plant communities has non-target effects on the fungi associated with solitary bee communities. We analyse fungal diversity and ecological networks formed between fungi and solitary bees present on 15 agricultural farms in the UK using samples from brood cells. The farms were allocated to two categories, low and high management, which differ in the number of agri-environmental measures implemented. Using internal transcribed spacer metabarcoding, we identified 456 fungal taxa that interact with solitary bees. Of these, 202 (approximately 44%) could be assigned to functional groups, the majority being pathotrophic and saprotrophic species. A large proportion was Ascosphaeraceae, a family of bee-specialist fungi. We considered the connectance, nestedness, modularity, nestedness overlap and decreasing fill, linkage density and fungal generality of the farms' bee-fungi ecological networks. We found no difference in the structure of bee-fungi ecological networks between low and high management farms, suggesting floral provision by AES has no significant impact on interactions between these two taxonomic groups. However, bee emergence was lower on the low management farms compared to high management, suggesting some limited non-target effects of AES. This study characterizes the fungal community associated with solitary bees and provides evidence that floral provision through AES does not impact fungal interactions.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Entomological ResearchSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207