Experimental removal reveals only weak interspecific competition between two coexisting lizards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Competition for resources is an important mechanism that shapes ecological communities. Interspecific competition can affect habitat selection, fitness, and abundance in animals. We used a removal experiment and mark–recapture to test the hypothesis that competition with the larger and more abundant Striped Plateau Lizard (Sceloporus virgatus H.M. Smith, 1938) limits habitat selection, fitness, and abundance in Ornate Tree Lizards (Urosaurus ornatus (Baird in Baird and Girard, 1852)). Ornate Tree Lizards in the plots where Striped Plateau Lizards were removed switched between habitat types more frequently and moved farther than Ornate Tree Lizards in control plots. However, there were no significant changes in the relative densities of Ornate Tree Lizards in each habitat type or in microhabitat use. We also found no changes in growth rates, survival, or abundance of Ornate Tree Lizards in response to the removal of Striped Plateau Lizards. Our results suggest that interspecific competition was not strong enough to limit habitat use or abundance of Ornate Tree Lizards. Perhaps interspecific competition is weak between coexisting species when resource levels are not severely depleted. Therefore, it is important to consider environmental conditions when assessing the importance of interspecific competition.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".