MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A bioenergetic framework for aboveground terrestrial food webs

2022· preprint· en· W4308231992 on OpenAlexaff
Sophia Simon, Fernanda S. Valdovinos, Kayla R S Hale, Sabine Dritz, Paul Glaum, Kevin S. McCann, Élisa Thébault, William C. Wetzel, Kate L Wootton, Justin D. Yeakel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersFACE FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBioenergeticsTrophic levelFood webTerrestrial ecosystemEcosystemEcologyBiodiversityTerrestrial plantAllometryPrimary producersTrophic cascadeEcosystem servicesEnvironmental resource managementFood chainEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bioenergetic approaches have been greatly influential for understanding community functioning and stability and predicting effects of environmental changes on biodiversity.These approaches use allometric relationships to establish species' trophic interactions and consumption rates, and have been most successfully applied to aquatic ecosystems.Terrestrial ecosystems, where body mass is less predictive of plant-consumer interactions, present inherent challenges that these models have yet to meet.Here, we discuss the processes governing terrestrial plant-consumer interactions and develop a bioenergetic framework integrating those processes.Our framework integrates bioenergetics specific to terrestrial plants and their consumers within a food-web approach.It also considers mutualistic interactions, advancing understanding of terrestrial food webs and predictions of their responses to environmental changes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→