Time stress and temperature explain continental variation in damselfly body size
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Body size is among the most important biological variables but despite much measurement of this trait, the factors driving its variation are not fully understood. Here, I describe variation in body size in the damselfly Calopteryx maculata to establish whether variations in growth and development observed in response to experimental manipulation of temperature and time stress in the laboratory can be scaled‐up to variation among natural populations. Nine hundred and seven specimens of C. maculata males were collected from 34 sites across the species’ entire range in North America during the summer of 2010. A general measure of body size was derived from a series of wing and leg measurements. I compare the fit of models based on latitude (Bergmann’s rule), temperature (the temperature–size rule) and seasonal effects (a combination of temperature and time stress) using Akaike’s information criterion (AIC). The U‐shaped relationship between size and latitude was best explained by a seasonality model containing both photoperiod and temperature. The presence of both these terms suggests that time stress dominates in the southern part of the range, reducing body size by accelerating development. However, the temperature–size rule dominates in the northern part of the range, increasing body size closer to the northern range margin. The best‐fit model of geographic variation in size is in accordance with previous laboratory studies of temperature and photoperiod in damselflies and theoretical work, indicating that the findings from such studies can be applied to natural populations. These findings are likely applicable to any species with complex life histories inhabiting seasonal environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".