Terrestrial invertebrates respond to food subsidies in dry streambeds of nonperennial rivers: effects of subsidy type and their moisture condition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-perennial streams alternate between wet and dry phases, with dry streambeds attracting high diversity of terrestrial invertebrates, likely due to accumulated aquatic food subsidies. However, this aspect is only beginning to be explored. We examined how different food subsidies (leaf litter, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates, and fish) attract terrestrial invertebrates in dry streambeds and how their moisture condition (wet vs. dry) influences this attraction. Field experiments were conducted in two Mediterranean non-perennial streams by adding these subsidies separately in each moisture condition and analyzing invertebrate responses (community structure and composition). We hypothesized that food subsidies attract terrestrial invertebrates, with structural and compositional responses varying by subsidy type and moisture condition. Subsidies affected terrestrial invertebrates only in one stream, influencing abundance and composition but not richness. Fish carrion in wet condition attracted the highest invertebrate abundance across all subsidies and moisture conditions. Community composition varied depending on subsidy type, regardless of moisture: fish carrion attracted mainly scavengers, while plant-based subsidies favored herbivores and detritivores. Our findings highlight the role of food subsidies in structuring terrestrial communities in dry streambeds and the complex interplay between community composition, subsidy type, and moisture conditions.
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".