MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164758642 · doi:10.1086/670198

Separating Intrinsic and Environmental Contributions to Growth and Their Population Consequences

2013· article· en· W2164758642 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew O. Shelton, William H. Satterthwaite, Michael P. Beakes, Stephan B. Munch, Susan M. Sogard, Marc Mangel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTraitVariation (astronomy)PopulationApproximate Bayesian computationLife history theoryBiologyPopulation modelPopulation growthRange (aeronautics)EconometricsEcologyLife historyDemographyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among-individual heterogeneity in growth is a commonly observed phenomenon that has clear consequences for population and community dynamics yet has proved difficult to quantify in practice. In particular, observed among-individual variation in growth can be difficult to link to any given mechanism. Here, we develop a Bayesian state-space framework for modeling growth that bridges the complexity of bioenergetic models and the statistical simplicity of phenomenological growth models. The model allows for intrinsic individual variation in traits, a shared environment, process stochasticity, and measurement error. We apply the model to two populations of steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) grown under common but temporally varying food conditions. Models allowing for individual variation match available data better than models that assume a single shared trait for all individuals. Estimated individual variation translated into a roughly twofold range in realized growth rates within populations. Comparisons between populations showed strong differences in trait means, trait variability, and responses to a shared environment. Together, individual- and population-level variation have substantial implications for variation in size and growth rates among and within populations. State-dependent life-history models predict that this variation can lead to differences in individual life-history expression, lifetime reproductive output, and population life-history diversity.

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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations41
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207