Environmental variability and population dynamics: do European and North American ducks play by the same rules?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Density dependence, population regulation, and variability in population size are fundamental population processes, the manifestation and interrelationships of which are affected by environmental variability. However, there are surprisingly few empirical studies that distinguish the effect of environmental variability from the effects of population processes. We took advantage of a unique system, in which populations of the same duck species or close ecological counterparts live in highly variable (north American prairies) and in stable (north European lakes) environments, to distinguish the relative contributions of environmental variability (measured as between-year fluctuations in wetland numbers) and intraspecific interactions (density dependence) in driving population dynamics. We tested whether populations living in stable environments (in northern Europe) were more strongly governed by density dependence than populations living in variable environments (in North America). We also addressed whether relative population dynamical responses to environmental variability versus density corresponded to differences in life history strategies between dabbling (relatively "fast species" and governed by environmental variability) and diving (relatively "slow species" and governed by density) ducks. As expected, the variance component of population fluctuations caused by changes in breeding environments was greater in North America than in Europe. Contrary to expectations, however, populations in more stable environments were not less variable nor clearly more strongly density dependent than populations in highly variable environments. Also, contrary to expectations, populations of diving ducks were neither more stable nor stronger density dependent than populations of dabbling ducks, and the effect of environmental variability on population dynamics was greater in diving than in dabbling ducks. In general, irrespective of continent and species life history, environmental variability contributed more to variation in species abundances than did density. Our findings underscore the need for more studies on populations of the same species in different environments to verify the generality of current explanations about population dynamics and its association with species life history.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".