MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Under strong niche overlap conspecifics do not compete but help each other to survive: facilitation at the intraspecific level

2010· article· en· W1541320621 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex Fajardo, Eliot J. B. McIntire

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Montana
KeywordsIntraspecific competitionFacilitationCompetition (biology)BiologyDensity dependenceNicheInterspecific competitionSowingEcologyExperimental forestPopulationFrugivoreBotanyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 1. Competition among conspecifics of the same cohort has been traditionally thought to be a main process driving population dynamics. In this classical view, however, the role of facilitation in stressful conditions has rarely been considered. Here, using a transplant experiment across a forest–prairie gradient, we test whether the stress gradient hypothesis (SGH) extends to individuals thought to be strongly competing. 2. We transplanted 2‐year‐old seedlings of Nothofagus pumilio at two different densities (clusters of 10 and isolated) and at different distances from the forest edge (from 30 m inside the forest up to 50 m outside the forest in the prairie). We further stem‐mapped all seedlings belonging to the clusters and computed a competition index (CI). After 3 years of growing, survival and increment growth in diameter and height were measured and analysed using mixed‐effects models. We conducted a nearest‐neighbour analysis using seedlings’ CI and growth and computed model fit using the area under the curve (AUC) method. 3. Seedlings planted in dense clusters had significantly higher survival than solitary seedlings at the stressful end of the gradient. This trend was reversed at the opposite end of the gradient, supporting the SGH at the intraspecific level. Pursuing this at the level of the individual, we found that higher CIs (more neighbours) in seedlings predicted higher probabilities of their survival (facilitation) in stressful conditions. 4. Seedlings diameter and height increment growth were not affected by planting density and only diameter varied along the stress gradient; seedlings had higher diameter increments in growth outside the forest. Finally, when compared with conceptual models, our results mostly support predictions of a higher facilitation at intermediate position along the gradient. 5. Synthesis. We showed that facilitation overrides competition among tree seedlings even at locations under moderate stress; the facilitation process occurs in resource‐mediated interactions (niche overlapping). These results represent an important shift in our way to understand the density‐dependent mortality process, and calls for a model reformulation including positive interactions even when competition is expected to be strongest (conspecifics of the same cohort).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations167
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207