MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992354070 · doi:10.3934/mbe.2010.7.603

Mechanisms for stable coexistence in an insect community

2010· article· en· W1992354070 on OpenAlexaff
Meng Fan, Bingbing Zhang, Michael Yi Li

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Biosciences & Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcyrthosiphon pisumParasitoidBiologyAphidTraitPredationPredatorEcologyExtinction (optical mineralogy)InsectCommunityFunctional responseHost (biology)Evolutionary biologyAphididaeHomopteraBotanyPEST analysisHabitatComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we formulate a three-species ecological community model consisting of two aphid species (Acyrthosiphon pisum and Megoura viciae) and a specialist parasitoid (Aphidius ervi) that attacks only one of the aphids (A pisum). The model incorporates both density-mediated and trait-mediated host-parasitoid interactions. Our analysis shows that the model possesses much richer and more realistic dynamics than earlier models. Our theoretical results reveal a new mechanism for stable coexistence in a three-species community in which any two species alone do not co-exist. More specifically, it is known that, when a predator is introduced into a community of two competing species, if the predator only predates on the strong competitor, it can allow the weak competitor to survive, but may drive the strong competitor to extinction through over-exploitation. We show that if the weak competitor interferes the predation on the strong competitor through trait-mediated indirect effects, then all three species can stably co-exist.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.153 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Biosciences & EngineeringSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207