Plant interactions can lead to emergent relationships between plant community diversity, productivity and vulnerability to invasion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding what makes a community vulnerable to invasion is integral to the successful management of invasive species. Our understanding of how characteristics of resident plant interactions, such as the network architecture of interactions, can affect the invasibility of plant communities is limited. Using a simulation model, we tested how successfully a new plant invader established in communities with different network architectures of species interactions. We also investigated whether species interaction networks lead to relationships between invasibility and other community properties also affected by species interaction networks, such as diversity, species dominance, compositional stability and the productivity of the resident community. We found that higher invasibility strongly related with a lower productivity of the resident community. Plant interaction networks influenced diversity and invasibility in ways that led to complex but clear relationships between the two. Heterospecific interactions that increased diversity tended to decrease invasibility. Negative conspecific interactions always increased diversity and invasibility, but increased invasibility more when they increased diversity less. This study provides new theoretical insights into the effects of plant interaction networks on community invasibility and relationships between diversity and invasibility. Combined with increasing empirical evidence, these insights could have useful implications for the management of invasive plant species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".