Organismal traits are more important than environment for species interactions in the intertidal zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species interactions come in a variety of forms, from weak to strong, and negative or positive, each with unique consequences for local community structure. However, interactions depend on several biotic, abiotic and scale-dependent variables that make their magnitude and direction difficult to predict. Here, we quantify the relative impacts of multiple factors on species interactions for a diverse array of intertidal organisms, using our own experiments across a range of environments in New Zealand and North America. Interaction strengths are related to organism body size and trophic level, but are relatively insensitive to environmental conditions associated with tidal height. Although species at higher trophic levels exert stronger per-capita effects on other taxa, their population-level impacts are equivalent to basal trophic groups. This indicates that interaction intensity is largely based on requirements for resources, such as food or space, that follow allometric scaling rules. These results demonstrate the potential to predict interactivity based on simple criteria without detailed information on particular species or 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".