The Prerequisites for and Likelihood of Generalist‐Specialist Coexistence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mathematical models of three-consumer-two-resource systems are used to explore the possibility of coexistence when one consumer is a generalist utilizing both resources, and the other two are specialists utilizing only one. Such coexistence requires strongly saturating functional or numerical responses in at least one consumer and the presence of sustained asynchronous variation in resource abundances. Given these conditions, the effects of three dichotomous factors on the range of parameters allowing coexistence are examined: flexible versus inflexible resource choice by the generalist, endogenous or exogenous cause of resource cycles, and location of the two resources in a single habitat versus two habitats. Coexistence of all three species is found to be possible for all combinations of these factors except for inflexible choice in a two-habitat environment. Generalists experience frequency-dependent fitness because, when they are abundant, they synchronize resource cycles and/or reduce their amplitude. When the generalist can adaptively adjust its relative foraging on the two resources, coexistence conditions are broadened considerably, and coexistence commonly occurs readily with exogenous variation in resource growth and with resources located in distinct habitats. Adaptive behavior increases the generalist's ability to both synchronize and dampen resource cycles.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".