Facilitation against herbivory more important than resource‐based niche differences for plant coexistence in a field experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Theory suggests that eutrophication impacts plant community biodiversity by constraining niche differences and increasing competitive inequalities among species, leading to the exclusion of weaker competitors. However, explicit tests of nutrient effects on the strength and direction of inter‐ and intraspecific plant–plant interactions that dictate coexistence are lacking, especially in complex field settings where multiple processes can simultaneously affect plant growth and reproduction. We conducted a field experiment in southeastern Vancouver Island, Canada, using four annual grassland plant species to test how species interactions responded to eutrophication and the covariation of herbivore pressure and neighbour species light‐ and moisture‐use. We found that focal species reproduction was limited by nutrient availability and herbivory, such that the nature of species interactions was context‐dependent. Competitive interactions failed to predict species persistence under these conditions. Instead, facilitation was critical—phytometers grown without neighbours consistently failed to produce seed under herbivore pressure meaning that fecundity significantly increased with neighbour density. Synthesis . Our work demonstrates the importance of species interactions in plant community responses to eutrophication but emphasizes that ‘indirect’ drivers of plant performance may influence or overwhelm nutrient effects on plant–plant competition. The widespread occurrence of mortality overcome primarily by facilitation highlights the importance of positive density dependence. Overall, our results suggest that knowledge of resource niche overlap may be insufficient to explain plant community responses to eutrophication. This highlights the necessity of considering the broader environmental context when leveraging ecological theory to understand global change effects in empirical settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".