MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stoichiometric food quality and herbivore dynamics

2001· article· en· W2106630050 on OpenAlexaff
E. Müller, Roger M. Nisbet, S.A.L.M. Kooijman, James J. Elser, Edward McCauley

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcosystem dynamics and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDaphniaHerbivoreBiologyEcological stoichiometryAlgaeEcologyNutrientLimitingCladoceraBranchiopodaZooplankton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Herbivores may grow with nutrient or energy limitation, depending on food abundance and the chemical composition of their food. We present a model that describes herbivore growth as a continuous function of two limiting factors. This function uses the synthesizing unit concept, has the hyperbolic Monod model as a limiting case, and has the same number of parameters as the Monod model coupled to Liebig’s discontinuous minimum rule. We use the model to explore nutrient‐limited herbivore growth in a closed system with algae, Daphnia and phosphorus as the limiting nutrient. Phosphorus in algae may substantially influence Daphnia growth. This influence changes over time and is most pronounced when algae and Daphnia populations fluctuate strongly. Relative to classic models that only consider food quantity as a determinant of Daphnia growth, our model shows richer dynamical behaviour. In addition to the standard positive equilibrium, which may be stable or unstable depending on nutrient availability, a new positive equilibrium may arise in our model when mortality rates are relatively high. This equilibrium is unstable and reduces the likelihood of long‐term persistence of Daphnia in the system.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicEcosystem dynamics and resilienceFrench-language works237,207