Determining the Functional Form of Density Dependence: Deductive Approaches for Consumer‐Resource Systems Having a Single Resource
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Consumer-resource models are used to deduce the functional form of density dependence in the consumer population. A general approach to determining the form of consumer density dependence is proposed; this involves determining the equilibrium (or average) population size for a series of different harvest rates. The relationship between a consumer's mortality and its equilibrium population size is explored for several one-consumer/one-resource models. The shape of density dependence in the resource and the shape of the numerical and functional responses all tend to be "inherited" by the consumer's density dependence. Consumer-resource models suggest that density dependence will very often have both concave and convex segments, something that is impossible under the commonly used theta-logistic model. A range of consumer-resource models predicts that consumer population size often declines at a decelerating rate with mortality at low mortality rates, is insensitive to or increases with mortality over a wide range of intermediate mortalities, and declines at a rapidly accelerating rate with increased mortality when mortality is high. This has important implications for management and conservation of natural populations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".