Large range sizes link fast life histories with high species richness across wet tropical tree floras
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding how the traits of lineages are related to diversification is key for elucidating the origin of variation in species richness. Here, we test whether traits are related to species richness among lineages of trees from all major biogeographical settings of the lowland wet tropics. We explore whether variation in mortality rate, breeding system and maximum diameter are related to species richness, either directly or via associations with range size, among 463 genera that contain wet tropical forest trees. For Amazonian genera, we also explore whether traits are related to species richness via variation among genera in mean species-level range size. Lineages with higher mortality rates-faster life-history strategies-have larger ranges in all biogeographic settings and have higher mean species-level range sizes in Amazonia. These lineages also have smaller maximum diameters and, in the Americas, contain dioecious species. In turn, lineages with greater overall range size have higher species richness. Our results show that fast life-history strategies influence species richness in all biogeographic settings because lineages with these ecological strategies have greater range sizes. These links suggest that dispersal has been a key process in the evolution of the tropical forest flora.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".