A dominant plant species and insects interactively shape plant community structure and an ecosystem function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dominant plants and insects both structure plant communities and determine key ecosystem functions. However, dominant plants and insects can have opposing effects on plant community structure and ecosystem function. Critically, few studies have assessed the combined effects of these two drivers of plant community structure and ecosystem function. In this study, we factorially manipulated the presence of the dominant plant species Solidago canadensis (Canada goldenrod) and insects in an old field to quantify their independent and interactive effects on the plant community. Overall, insect presence mediated the effects of S. canadensis removal on plant biomass and richness. Total plant biomass was ~32% lower following S. canadensis removal only when insects were present. In contrast, subdominant plant biomass was ~75% higher following S. canadensis removal, but only when insects were reduced. Subdominant species richness was ~37% higher following S. canadensis removal when insects were present, although the abundance of most subdominant species did not vary systematically with S. canadensis removal or insect reduction. Light availability was ~49% higher following S. canadensis removal, with no effect of insect presence on light availability. Our results emphasize the interactive role of dominant plants and insects in determining the diversity and biomass of plant communities.
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".