MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EVOLUTION OF NICHE WIDTH AND ADAPTIVE DIVERSIFICATION

2004· article· en· W2034000918 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaJames S. McDonnell Foundation
KeywordsNicheDiversification (marketing strategy)BiologyEcological nicheCompetition (biology)Evolutionary biologyAdaptive strategiesEcologyBusinessHabitatGeographyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theoretical models suggest that resource competition can lead to the adaptive splitting of consumer populations into diverging lineages, that is, to adaptive diversification. In general, diversification is likely if consumers use only a narrow range of resources and thus have a small niche width. Here we use analytical and numerical methods to study the consequences for diversification if the niche width itself evolves. We found that the evolutionary outcome depends on the inherent costs or benefits of widening the niche. If widening the niche did not have costs in terms of overall resource uptake, then the consumer evolved a niche that was wide enough for disruptive selection on the niche position to vanish; adaptive diversification was no longer observed. However, if widening the niche was costly, then the niche widths remained relatively narrow, allowing for adaptive diversification in niche position. Adaptive diversification and speciation resulting from competition for a broadly distributed resource is thus likely if the niche width is fixed and relatively narrow or free to evolve but subject to costs. These results refine the conditions for adaptive diversification due to competition and formulate them in a way that might be more amenable for experimental investigations.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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