Data from: Herbivory and pollen limitation at the upper elevational range limit of two forest understory plants of eastern North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of species’ range limits focus most often on abiotic factors, although the strength of biotic interactions might also vary along environmental gradients and have strong demographic effects. For example, pollinator abundance might decrease at range limits due to harsh environmental conditions, and reduced plant density can reduce attractiveness to pollinators and increase or decrease herbivory. We tested for variation in the strength of pollen limitation and herbivory by ungulates along a gradient leading to the upper elevational range limits of Trillium erectum (Melanthiaceae) and Erythronium americanum (Liliaceae) in Mont-Mégantic National Park, Québec, Canada. In T. erectum, pollen limitation was higher at the range limit, but seed set decreased only slightly with elevation and only in one of two years. In contrast, herbivory of T. erectum increased from <10% at low elevations to >60% at the upper elevational range limit. In E. americanum, we found no evidence of pollen limitation despite a significant decrease in seed set with elevation, and herbivory was low across the entire gradient. Overall, our results demonstrate the potential for relatively strong negative interactions (herbivory) and weak positive interactions (pollination) at plant range edges, although this was clearly species-specific. To the extent that these interactions have important demographic consequences – highly likely for herbivory on Trillium, based on previous studies – such interactions might play a role in determining plant species’ range limits along putatively climatic gradients.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".