MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404869960 · doi:10.1002/eap.3067

Variation in flower morphology associated with higher bee diversity in urban green spaces

2024· article· en· W4404869960 on OpenAlexafffundabout
S. Sinno, Gail MacInnis, J. LESSARD, Carly D. Ziter

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsSpecies richnessTraitPollinatorEcologyNectarBiodiversityBiologyDiversity (politics)UrbanizationPollinationPollenSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urbanization is a leading threat to biodiversity, but scientifically informed management of urban ecosystems can mitigate negative impacts. For wild bees, which are declining worldwide, careful consideration of flower choice in public and private green spaces could help preserve their diversity. While floral density and species richness are both linked to wild bee diversity, the mechanisms underlying these relationships are not fully understood. Here, we tested two hypotheses relating the influence of floral trait composition to bee species richness, which we have termed the within-trait diversity and optimal floral trait hypotheses. Specifically, we assessed whether variation in bee richness relates to variation in the weighted variance (trait diversity) and mean (optimal trait) of floral traits observed in urban green spaces across the city of Montreal, Canada. Our analyses focused on two floral traits relating to pollinator feeding success: nectar sugar concentration and corolla length. After accounting for variation in floral density among sites, bee richness was positively related to community-weighted variance in corolla length, supporting the within-trait diversity hypothesis. These findings suggest that management practices that increase the diversity of flower morphologies in urban green spaces can promote the persistence of wild bee communities in cities.

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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207