MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385634117 · doi:10.1080/11956860.2023.2244301

Predator types, urbanization, and tree cover drive top-down control of herbivorous and carnivorous preys in an urban agroecosystem

2023· article· en· W4385634117 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Asraf K. Lidasan, Jirriza O. Roquero, Navel Kyla B. Balasa, Angelo Rellama Agduma, Renee Jane A. Ele, Krizler C. Tanalgo

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationTrophic levelEcologyHerbivorePredatorBiologyAgroecosystemTrophic cascadeEcosystemAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prey-predator interactions hold significant importance, widely acknowledged as crucial processes within ecosystems. Yet, there is a scarcity of empirical data that effectively illustrates the influence of urbanization on such interactions. We performed a common garden experiment utilizing 1250 clay models to assess the predation risks faced by herbivorous and carnivorous prey in an urban agroecosystem in the southern Philippines. Our findings revealed significant differences in attack risks between the trophic levels, with herbivorous caterpillars (n = 246; 53.25%) experiencing higher predation rates compared to carnivorous lizards (n = 216; 46.75%). Interestingly, while the trophic level of the prey did not directly predict predation risk, the presence of predators showed significant effects. Arthropods emerged as the dominant predators of herbivorous prey compared to other predators, whereas mammalian predators predominantly attacked carnivorous prey. The landscape variable also had a strong influence on the risk of predation. We found that increasing tree cover was significantly related to increased predation risk, while built-up showed the opposite. Our research findings support the ‘increasing disturbance hypothesis’, suggesting that rising urbanization rates reduce predator diversity, resulting in a decrease and loss of predation pressure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207