Individual-level size distribution patterns in fruit-feeding butterfly communities along a forest restoration gradient in the Afrotropics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The loss and degradation of tropical rainforests pose significant challenges to global conservation, yet the impact of forest restoration on the functional diversity of animal communities, particularly at the intraspecific level, remains poorly understood. This study investigates the size distribution of fruit-feeding butterflies along a gradient of tropical forest restoration ages in Kibale National Park, Uganda. Study sites were categorised into three forest age groups: younger restored (10–16 years), older restored (21–26 years), and primary forests. Butterflies were sampled across 48 sites, and individual forewing lengths were measured to analyse changes in mean forewing length, diversity, skewness, and kurtosis. The mean forewing length and diversity increased, while skewness and kurtosis decreased, towards primary forest age group. Significant differences in size metrics were observed among forest age groups, with younger restored forests showing lower diversity compared to older restored and primary forests. Intraspecific differences in forewing length were detected in six of the 12 species studied, highlighting the nuanced insights provided by individual-level data compared to species-level analyses. Kernel density plots demonstrated a gradual shift towards more uniform size distributions along the restoration gradient, suggesting that morphological diversity increases as forests mature. These findings underscore the value of considering intraspecific variation in understanding community responses to forest restoration. The study highlights the prolonged but steady progress towards primary forest, offering important implications for tropical forest conservation and applied ecology. • Examines size distribution in butterflies across forest restoration age gradients. • Finds increased forewing length diversity and reduced skewness as forests mature. • Identifies significant intraspecific size variation in six of 12 butterfly species. • Highlights discrepancies in patterns using individual- versus species-level data. • Emphasizes the importance of morphology in monitoring forest restoration progress.
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".