Mammal population regulation, keystone processes and ecosystem dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theory of regulation in animal populations is fundamental to understanding the dynamics of populations, the causes of mortality and how natural selection shapes the life history of species. In mammals, the great range in body size allows us to see how allometric relationships affect the mode of regulation. Resource limitation is the fundamental cause of regulation. Top-down limitation through predators is determined by four factors: (i). body size; (ii). the diversity of predators and prey in the system; (iii). whether prey are resident or migratory; and (iv). the presence of alternative prey for predators. Body size in mammals has two important consequences. First, mammals, particularly large species, can act as keystones that determine the diversity of an ecosystem. I show how keystone processes can, in principle, be measured using the example of the wildebeest in the Serengeti ecosystem. Second, mammals act as ecological landscapers by altering vegetation succession. Mammals alter physical structure, ecological function and species diversity in most terrestrial biomes. In general, there is a close interaction between allometry, population regulation, life history and ecosystem dynamics. These relationships are relevant to applied aspects of conservation and pest management.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".