A hump‐shaped relationship between isolation and abundance of<i>Notonecta irrorata</i>colonists in aquatic mesocosms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the relationship between the isolation of experimental aquatic mesocosms and the abundance of an aquatic insect colonist, Notonecta irrorata, over two years. We used a curve-fitting approach to assess whether linear or quadratic models better describe the relationship between isolation and abundance. For two measures of mesocosm isolation, distance to nearest source and distance to the largest source population, there was a significant quadratic relationship between isolation and abundance. Abundance of colonizing N. irrorata was not found to be significantly related to a third measure of isolation, mesocosm connectivity. These results indicate that the relationship between habitat isolation and colonist abundance may not be a monotonic decline across all spatial scales, a finding that contradicts the usual assumption incorporated in measures of habitat connectivity. Our results suggest that under some circumstances individuals that have undertaken dispersal may bypass patches they encounter early in this process and preferentially settle in patches encountered later. This behavioral preference in conjunction with decreased numbers of potential colonists at sites far from the source environment could lead to the "hump-shaped" colonist abundance by habitat isolation relationship we observed in this study. We suggest that simple assumptions about the relationship between habitat isolation and the probability a site is colonized need to be reexamined and alternative possible forms of this relationship tested.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".