Climate, history and life‐history strategies interact in explaining differential macroecological patterns in freshwater zooplankton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim We investigated how freshwater microcrustaceans with different susceptibilities to Allee effects differ in the distribution of their geographical range size (GRS) and diversity along latitudinal gradients, evaluating the importance of climatic and historical factors in explaining these differences. We hypothesized that sexual copepods would have a smaller GRS and that their distribution would be linked to historical processes due to mate‐finding Allee effects during colonization. Given that cyclic parthenogenetic cladocerans avoid these Allee effects, we predicted that they would exhibit a larger GRS and their distribution would be related to climatic factors rather than dispersal limitation. Location Canadian watersheds, North America. Methods We used a database containing the presence–absence of freshwater zooplankton across 1665 Canadian lakes along a latitudinal gradient of 40°. We computed GRS using minimum convex polygons encompassing all lakes in which each species was present. We pooled the diversity of lakes within watersheds, and computed linear regressions models between watershed diversity and average GRS with the average latitude, distance from a glacial refugium and environmental variables of the watershed. All analyses were performed separately for cladocerans and copepods. Results Cladocerans exhibited, on average, a GRS 70% larger than that of copepods. We found a strong relationship between diversity (negative) and average GRS (positive) with latitude for cladocerans but not for copepods. Cladoceran macroecological patterns were mainly explained by climatic factors, whereas the lack of latitudinal gradients in copepods was potentially due to the influence of a northern glacial refuge and dispersal limitation. Main conclusions Our results show that Allee effects are strongly and negatively associated with GRS, influencing the relative importance of environmental filtering and dispersal limitation on species diversity patterns. We suggest that studies should avoid lumping species with large differences in their susceptibility to Allee effects in order to better disentangle the multiple processes affecting large‐scale patterns.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".