Borealisation of Plant Communities in the Arctic Is Driven by Boreal‐Tundra Species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following rapid climate change, tundra plant communities are experiencing extensive compositional shifts. A conservation concern is the potential encroachment of boreal species into the tundra ('borealisation'). Tundra borealisation has been sporadically reported, but not systematically quantified. Here, we synthesised data from across 32 study areas, spanning 1137 plots and 287 vascular plant species, resurveyed between 1981 and 2023. We (i) quantified tundra borealisation as the colonisation and increase in abundance of Boreal and Boreal-Tundra species, (ii) assessed biogeographical, climatic and local borealisation drivers and (iii) identified species contributing to borealisation and their associated traits. Half of the plots experienced borealisation, although borealisation rates were not different to random expectation. Borealisation was greater in Eurasia, closer to the treeline, at higher elevations, in warmer and wetter regions, where climate change was limited, and where initial boreal abundance was lower. Boreal coloniser species were generally short-statured, and more often shrubs and graminoids. Boreal species colonised around three times less frequently than Boreal-Tundra species. Hence, our findings indicate that tundra borealisation is mainly driven by the spread of already established boreal-low Arctic tundra species. These plant community composition changes could have cascading impacts on land-atmosphere interactions, trophic dynamics and Indigenous and local livelihoods.
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".