Multiple dynamics in a single predator–prey system: experimental effects of food quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work with the freshwater zooplankton Daphnia has suggested that the quality of its algal prey can have a significant effect on its demographic rates and life-history patterns. Predator-prey theory linking food quantity and food quality predicts that a single system should be able to display two distinct patterns of population dynamics. One pattern is predicted to have high herbivore and low algal biomass dynamics (high HBD), whereas the other is predicted to have low herbivore and high algal biomass dynamics (low HBD). Despite these predictions and the stoichiometric evidence that many phytoplankton communities may have poor access to food of quality, there have been few tests of whether a dynamic predator-prey system can display both of these distinct patterns. Here we report, to the authors' knowledge, the first evidence for two dynamical patterns, as predicted by theory, in a single predator-prey system. We show that the high HBD is a result of food quantity effects and that the low HBD is a result of food quality effects, which are maintained by phosphorus limitation in the predator. These results provide an important link between the known effects of nutrient limitation in herbivores and the significance of prey quality in predator-prey population dynamics in natural zooplankton communities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".