Bibliographic record
Abstract
I give an overview of the observational and experimental evidence for ecological character displacement in adaptive radiation. Sixty‐one published cases of character displacement involving closely related species (congeners) make up the observational data set. All cases involve divergence, even though parallel and convergent displacement are theoretically possible. Character ratios in sympatry were greatest when displacement was symmetric (mean 1.54) and least when asymmetric (mean 1.29), perhaps because the most symmetric resource distributions are also the broadest. Carnivores are vastly overrepresented in the data compared with other trophic groups, with herbivores the next most common category. I consider five hypotheses to explain this pattern, including the possibility that the likelihood of divergence via competition depends on position in food webs. Overall, the quality and completeness of observational data has improved in recent years, as judged by the extent to which individual cases satisfy six standard criteria. All but one of the criteria are met in over half the cases. Most often lacking is independent evidence that the species involved compete for resources. For this reason, we cannot be sure that divergence in sympatry is usually the result of resource competition rather than some other interaction. Field experiments on character displacement, which explore how interaction strength changes per unit change in phenotypic traits, are only just beginning. I summarize research on threespine sticklebacks that used experiments in ponds to test three predictions: that present‐day differences between sympatric species are a “ghost” of competition past; that adding a competitor alters natural selection pressures on a species already present, favoring divergence; and that divergent natural selection stemming from resource competition is frequency dependent. In total, the evidence suggests that character displacement occurs frequently in nature, and it probably plays an important role in the evolution of diversity in many adaptive radiations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".