Can temperature modify the strength of density‐dependent habitat selection in ectotherms? A test with red flour beetles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Habitat selection is an important aspect of the ecology of animals and models predict that density dependence is a strong force shaping patterns of habitat selection. In ectotherms, however, density dependence of fitness tends to weaken as temperature deviates from the species’ optimal temperature ( T o ). This may have important implications for density‐dependent habitat selection because the underlying mechanism for density‐dependent habitat selection is density dependence in fitness. We examine how temperature can modify the predictions from isodar theory and obtain temperature‐dependent predictions for density‐dependent habitat selection. We specifically predict that the isodar's intercept will be furthest from zero and the slope will be steepest at the optimal temperature. As temperature deviates from the optimal temperature, we predict that the intercept will approach zero and the slope will approach one. We then test these predictions with experiments on habitat selection based on food abundance by red flour beetles in the laboratory. We also confirm that fitness decreases as density increases and that density dependence weakens as temperature deviates from T o . In agreement with our predictions, preference for habitats with more food weakened as density dependence weakened. Our results have implications for habitat selection by ectotherms because we demonstrate that variation in environmental temperature can weaken markedly the effect of density on both fitness and habitat selection. High density may entail no fitness costs for ectotherms that cannot maintain their optimal temperature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".