Trophic Interactions Are Key to Understanding the Effects of Global Change on the Distribution and Functional Role of the Brown Bear
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biotic interactions are expected to influence species' responses to global changes, but they are rarely considered across broad spatial extents. Abiotic factors are thought to operate at larger spatial scales, while biotic factors, such as species interactions, are considered more important at local scales within communities, in part because of the knowledge gap on species interactions at large spatial scales (i.e., the Eltonian shortfall). We assessed, at a continental scale, (i) the importance of biotic interactions, through food webs, on species distributions, and (ii) how biotic interactions under scenarios of climate and land-use change may affect the distribution of the brown bear (Ursus arctos). We built a highly detailed, spatially dynamic, and empirically sampled food web based on the energy contribution of 276 brown bear food species from different taxa (plants, vertebrates, and invertebrates) and their ensemble habitat models at high resolution across Europe. Then, combining energy contribution and predicted habitat of food species, we modelled energy contribution across space and included these layers within Bayesian-based models of the brown bear distribution in Europe. The inclusion of biotic interactions considerably improved our understanding of brown bear distribution at large (continental) scales compared with Bayesian models including only abiotic factors (climate and land use). Predicted future range shifts, which included changes in the distribution of food species, varied greatly when considering various scenarios of change in biotic factors, providing a warning that future indirect climate and land-use change are likely to have strong but highly uncertain impacts on species biogeography. Our study confirmed that advancing our understanding of ecological networks of species interactions will improve future projections of biodiversity change, especially for modelling species distributions and their functional role under climate and land-use change scenarios, which is key for effective conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".