Cross-ecosystem differences in stability and the principle of energy flux
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here, we review consumer-resource (C-R) theory to show that the paradox of enrichment is a special case of a more general theoretical result. That is, we show that increased energy flux, relative to the consumer loss rate, makes C-R interactions top heavy (i.e., greater C:R biomass ratio) and less stable. We then review the literature on the attributes of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems to argue that empirical estimates of parameters governing energy flux find that aquatic ecosystems have higher rates of relative energy flux than terrestrial ecosystems. Consistent with theory, we then review empirical work that shows aquatic ecosystems have greater herbivore:plant biomass ratios while we produce novel data to show that aquatic ecosystems have greater variability in population dynamics than their terrestrial counterparts. We end by arguing that theory, allometric relationships and a significant, negative correlation between body size and population variability suggest that these results may be driven by the smaller average body sizes of aquatic organisms relative to terrestrial organisms.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it