Is Diet Quality an Overlooked Mechanism for Bergmann’s Rule?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bergmann's rule (body size increases with latitude) has long interested biologists; however, its mechanism remains unclear. An overlooked mechanism (latitudinal variation in plant quality) might help explain Bergmann's rule. We studied three herbivores. In the field, the planthopper Prokelisia and the sea hare Aplysia, but not the long-horned grasshopper Orchelimum, were larger at high latitudes, following Bergmann's rule. In the laboratory, all three species grew larger or faster on high-latitude plants. High-latitude diets increased Prokelisia size and Aplysia growth rates by 8% and 72%, respectively, enough to explain the increase in field body size toward high latitudes. Therefore, latitudinal variation in herbivore body size could be influenced by latitudinal variation in plant quality, which may directly or indirectly also affect body size in detritivores, parasitoids, and predators. Studies of Bergmann's rule should consider the influence of biotic factors on body size in addition to abiotic factors such as temperature and precipitation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".