MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367319224 · doi:10.1111/geb.13686

Climate or diet? The importance of biotic interactions in determining species range size

2023· article· en· W4367319224 on OpenAlexaff
Núria Galiana, Miguel Lurgi, José M. Montoya, Miguel B. Araújo, Eric D. Galbraith

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEuropean CommissionMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsEcologyRange (aeronautics)Ecological nicheNicheTrophic levelBiologyMacroecologyExtinction (optical mineralogy)Species diversitySpecies richnessSpecies distributionHerbivoreInterspecific competitionEcosystemHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Species geographical range sizes play a crucial role in determining species vulnerability to extinction. Although several mechanisms affect range sizes, the number of biotic interactions and species climatic tolerance are often thought to play discernible roles, defining two dimensions of the Hutchinsonian niche. Yet, the relative importance of the trophic and the climatic niche for determining species range sizes is largely unknown. Location Central and northern Europe. Time period Present. Major taxa studied Gall‐inducing sawflies and their parasitoids. Methods We use data documenting the spatial distributions and biotic interactions of 96 herbivore species, and their 125 parasitoids, across Europe and analyse the relationship between species range size and the climatic and trophic dimensions of the niche. We then compare the observed relationships with null expectations based on species occupancy to understand whether the relationships observed are an inevitable consequence of species range size or if they contain information about the importance of each dimension of the niche on species range size. Results We find that both niche dimensions are positively correlated with species range size, with larger ranges being associated with wider climatic tolerances and larger numbers of interactions. However, diet breadth appears to more strongly limit species range size. Species with larger ranges have more interactions locally and they are also able to interact with a larger diversity of species across sites (i.e. higher β‐diversity), resulting in a larger number of interactions at continental scales. Main conclusions We show for the first time how different aspects of species diet niches are related to their range size. Our study offers new insight into the importance of biotic interactions in determining species spatial distributions, which is critical for improving understanding and predictions of species vulnerability to extinction under the current rates of global environmental change.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and BiogeographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207