Fear creates an Allee effect: experimental evidence from seasonal populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allee effects driven by predation can play a strong role in the decline of small populations but are conventionally thought to occur when generalist predators target specific prey (i.e. type II functional response). However, aside from direct consumption, fear of predators could also increase vigilance and reduce time spent foraging as population size decreases, as has been observed in wild mammals living in social groups. To investigate the role of fear on fitness in relation to population density in a species with limited sociality, we exposed varying densities ofDrosophila melanogasterto mantid predators either during an experimental breeding season or non-breeding season. The presence of mantids in either season decreased the reproductive performance of individuals but only at low breeding densities, providing evidence for an Allee effect. We then used our experimental results to parametrize a mathematical model to examine the population consequences of fear at low densities. Fear tended to destabilize population dynamics and increase the risk of extinction up to sevenfold. Our study provides unique experimental evidence that the indirect effects of the presence of predators can cause an Allee effect and has important consequences for our understanding of the dynamics of small populations.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".