MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2202780778 · doi:10.1086/588060

On Net Reproductive Rate and the Timing of Reproductive Output

2008· article· en· W2202780778 on OpenAlexaff
T. de-Camino-Beck, Mark A. Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulation dynamicsPopulationReproductionLife historyBiologyLife history theoryPopulation growthVariance (accounting)Generation timeReproductive valueStatisticsMathematicsEconometricsDemographyEcologyEconomicsFecundity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Understanding the relationship between life-history patterns and population growth is central to demographic studies. Here we derive a new method for calculating the timing of reproductive output, from which the generation time and its variance can also be calculated. The method is based on the explicit computation of the net reproductive rate (R0) using a new graphical approach. Using nodding thistle, desert tortoise, creeping aven, and cat's ear as examples, we show how R0 and the timing of reproduction is calculated and interpreted, even in cases with complex life cycles. We show that the explicit R0 formula allows us to explore the effect of all reproductive pathways in the life cycle, something that cannot be done with traditional analysis of the population growth rate (lambda). Additionally, we compare a recently published method for determining population persistence conditions with the condition R0 > 1 and show how the latter is simpler and more easily interpreted biologically. Using our calculation of the timing of reproductive output, we illustrate how this demographic measure can be used to understand the effects of life-history traits on population growth and control.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 studies0.0000.007
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

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

Citations43
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207