Resource competition between genetically varied and genetically uniform populations of Daphnia pulex (Leydig): does sexual reproduction confer a short-term ecological advantage?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Small competitive advantages may suffice to compensate for a large disadvantage in intrinsic growth capacity. This well-known principle from ecology has recently been applied to the enduring question of how sexual reproduction can persist in the face of invasion by female-only parthenogens. Small competitive advantages resulting directly from sexual reproduction are predicted to cancel a two-fold disadvantage in intrinsic growth capacity caused by males (which do not themselves produce offspring) comprising half the sexual population. In this paper we test the principal assumption of this theory, that the genetic variation produced by sexual reproduction confers a competitive advantage over self-identical asexual invaders. We set up competition between a diverse clonal assembly of Daphnia pulex and genetically uniform populations from single clones. At young ages, the population comprising genetically varied Daphnia had significantly higher birth rates in competition with populations of genetically uniform Daphnia than in competition with itself, indicating competitive release and a Lotka–Volterra competition coefficient α12 < 1. No such difference was apparent under conditions of greater food stress, possibly due to individuals channelling more energy into survival, or for old-aged populations, possibly as a result of reduced selective pressures for high reproduction in old females. Mean birth rates differed between the clones at all ages in the presence of competition, providing evidence of variation in life history traits between clones. A Lotka–Volterra model predicted empirical estimates of α12 = 0.896 (genetically uniform on varied) and α21 = 1.010 (varied on uniform), which permits immediate coexistence of a sexual population of D. pulex even with an asexual lineage having twice the intrinsic growth capacity.
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 | 0.001 | 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".