Testing for synergistic effects of natural and anthropogenic disturbance on ecological communities at a landscape scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Anthropogenic and natural disturbances may interact synergistically, magnifying their individual effects on biodiversity. However, few studies have measured responses of ecological communities to multiple stressors at landscape scales. Objectives: We use a long-term dataset to test for synergistic effects of anthropogenic and natural disturbance on plant community diversity and composition in a large protected area. Methods: We quantified changes in plant communities over two decades in 98 plots in Waterton Lakes National Park, Canada. Fifty-three plots burned in a wildfire in the interim. We modeled the effects of wildfire, proximity to trails or roads, and their interaction on changes in species richness, community composition, relative abundance of disturbance-associated species, and colonization by exotic species. Results: Interactions between wildfire and proximity to roads and trails affected all metrics except species richness. Only one interaction was synergistic: the relative abundance of disturbance-associated species following wildfire was magnified closer to recreational corridors. The other community metrics showed unexpected patterns. For example, plots with no exotic species in the baseline survey that burned in the wildfire were more likely to gain exotic species than unburned plots only when they were distant from recreational corridors. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates interactive effects of natural and anthropogenic disturbance at landscape scales within a protected area. Plant community response to wildfire was influenced by proximity to recreational corridors, sometimes in surprising ways. As the frequency and severity of anthropogenic and natural disturbances both continue to rise, documenting the prevalence and magnitude of interactions between them is key to predicting long-term effects and designing mitigation strategies. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-024-01844-w.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".