<scp>HSS</scp> revisited: multi‐channel processes mediate trophic control across a productivity gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Classical food web theory holds that energy channels are regulated by top-down control with increasing productivity, arising from within-channel processes. However, these hypotheses do not consider the existence of parallel energy channels linked by shared resource pools and which can fuel generalist predators, imposing trophic control arising from multi-channel processes. Using 23 large marine food webs, we show that food web responses to increasing productivity are consistent with the apparent trophic cascade hypothesis (ATCH) - with rising productivity predators derive an increasing fraction of their diet from increasingly productive bottom-up controlled detritus channels, thereby subsidising predator biomass, and in turn strengthening top-down control in parallel grazing channels. These results testify to a fundamental role of detritus channels specifically and multi-channel processes in general in mediating food web response to productivity and demonstrate that the ATCH provides an alternative explanation for classical predictions of top-down control.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".