Apex Predator Recolonization Effects on Mesopredator Release and Prey Community Structure in Temperate Forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loss of apex predators has restructured numerous temperate forest ecosystems, releasing mesopredators and reducing prey diversity. This paper explores the ecological effects of apex predator recolonization on mesopredator species and the makeup of prey communities in temperate forest ecosystems. Using a combination of long-term camera-trap data (n = 120 sites), prey abundance surveys, and occupancy modeling, we compared ecosystem change during the pre- and post-apex predator return periods (10 years). Findings indicate that mesopredator abundance decreased by 41% (p< 0.01) after apex predator recolonization, and the occupancy probability fell to 0.42. At the same time, the richness of prey species and total prey abundance rose by 27 and 19% (p < 0.05), respectively, especially in small mammals and ground-nesting birds. Examples of trophic cascade effects included a 14% increase in vegetation cover in regions where apex predators remained. Structural equation modeling revealed that apex predators exerted both a direct suppressive influence on mesopredators (β = -0.58) and an indirect positive influence on prey communities (β = 0.44). The results indicate that, to some extent, ecological balance can be restored through the recolonization of apex predators, thereby reducing mesopredator release and increasing biodiversity. This study shows that predator conservation and reintroductions are important in ecosystem management. Overall, this study is well supported by empirical evidence: re-establishing the upper control processes can strengthen the resilience and diversity of the temperate forest ecosystem.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".