MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Extending the stress‐gradient hypothesis – is competition among animals less common in harsh environments?

2012· article· en· W2119528487 on OpenAlexafffund
Isabel C. Barrio, David S. Hik, C. Guillermo Bueno, James F. Cahill

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam TrustsAXA Research Fund
KeywordsHerbivoreEcologyInterspecific competitionCompetition (biology)Abiotic componentBiologyFacilitationProductivityCommunityEcosystemNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of positive interactions has become widely accepted as a mechanism shaping community dynamics. Most empirical evidence comes from plant communities and sessile marine organisms. However, evidence for the relative role of positive interactions in organizing terrestrial animal communities is more limited, and a general framework that includes positive interactions among animals is lacking. The ‘stress gradient hypothesis’ (SGH) developed by plant ecologists predicts that the balance between positive and negative interactions will vary along gradients of biotic and abiotic stress, with positive interactions being more important in stressful environments. Paralleling the SGH, stress gradients for terrestrial herbivores could be equated to inverse primary productivity gradients, so we would expect positive interactions to prevail in more stressful, low productivity environments. However, this contradicts the typical view of terrestrial animal ecology that low primary productivity systems will foster intense competition for resources among consumers. Here we use alpine herbivores as a case study to test one of the predictions of the SGH in animal communities, namely the prevalence of positive interactions in low productivity environments. We identify potential mechanisms of facilitation and review the limited number of examples of interspecific interactions among alpine herbivores to assess the role of positive and negative interactions in structuring their communities. A meta‐analysis showed no clear trend in the strength and direction of interactions among alpine herbivores. Although studies were biased towards reporting significant negative inter actions, we found no evidence of competition dominating in harsh environments. Thus, our results only partially support the SGH, but directly challenge the dominant view among animal ecologists. Clearly, a sound theoretical framework is needed to include competition, positive and neutral interactions as potential mechanisms determining the structure of animal communities under differing environmental conditions, and the stress‐gradient hypothesis can provide a solid starting point.

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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.151 · 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

Citations93
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207