Carry-over effects, sequential density dependence and the dynamics of populations in a seasonal environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most animal populations have distinct breeding and non-breeding periods, yet the implications of seasonality on population dynamics are not well understood. Here, we introduce an experimental model system to study the population dynamics of two important consequences of seasonality: sequential density dependence and carry-over effects (COEs). Using a replicated seasonal population of Drosophila, we placed individuals at four densities in the non-breeding season and then, among those that survived, placed them to breed at three different densities. We show that COEs arising from variation in non-breeding density negatively impacts individual performance by reducing per capita breeding output by 29-77%, implying that non-lethal COEs can have a strong influence on population abundance. We then parametrized a bi-seasonal population model from the experimental results, and show that both sequential density dependence and COEs can stabilize long-term population dynamics and that COEs can reduce population size at low intrinsic rates of growth. Our results have important implications for predicting the successful colonization of new habitats, and for understanding the long-term persistence of seasonal populations in a wide range of taxa, including migratory organisms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".