MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2206004685 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2015.1589

Latitudinal gradients in biotic niche breadth vary across ecosystem types

2015· article· en· W2206004685 on OpenAlexafffund
Alyssa R. Cirtwill, Daniel B. Stouffer, Tamara N. Romanuk

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaRoyal Society Te ApārangiRoyal SocietyMarsden FundUniversities Space Research Association
KeywordsNicheEcosystemEcologyBiotic componentAbiotic componentGeographyEcological nicheBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several properties of food webs-the networks of feeding links between species-are known to vary systematically with the species richness of the underlying community. Under the 'latitude-niche breadth hypothesis', which predicts that species in the tropics will tend to evolve narrower niches, one might expect that these scaling relationships could also be affected by latitude. To test this hypothesis, we analysed the scaling relationships between species richness and average generality, vulnerability and links per species across a set of 196 empirical food webs. In estuarine, marine and terrestrial food webs there was no effect of latitude on any scaling relationship, suggesting constant niche breadth in these habitats. In freshwater communities, on the other hand, there were strong effects of latitude on scaling relationships, supporting the latitude-niche breadth hypothesis. These contrasting findings indicate that it may be more important to account for habitat than latitude when exploring gradients in food-web structure.

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)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations54
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207