Evolutionary and ecological feedbacks of the survival cost of reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arguably the most fundamental of trade-offs in life-history evolution is the increase in natural mortality resulting from sexual maturity and reproduction. Despite its central importance, this increase in mortality, a survival cost, garners surprisingly little attention in fish and fisheries modeling studies. We undertook an exploratory analysis to evaluate the consequences of this omission for life-history projections. To this end, we developed a simulation approach that integrates quantitative genetics into the ecological dynamics of a fish population and parameterized the model for Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua, L.). When compared to simulations in which the mortality of immature and mature individuals is equal, the inclusion of a survival cost results in larger asymptotic body size, older age at maturity, and larger size at maturity. We also find that measures of population productivity (spawning stock biomass, recruits-per-spawner) are overestimated if the survival cost is excluded. This sensitivity of key metrics of population growth rate and reproductive capacity to the magnitude of the survival cost of reproduction underscores the need to explicitly account for this trade-off in projections of fish population responses to natural and anthropogenic environmental change, including fisheries.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".