MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885550980 · doi:10.1111/evo.13567

The effect of range overlap on ecological niche divergence depends on spatial scale in monkeyflowers

2018· article· en· W2885550980 on OpenAlexafffund
Qin Li, Dena L. Grossenbacher, Amy L. Angert

Bibliographic record

VenueEvolution · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyNicheRange (aeronautics)Divergence (linguistics)EcologyEcological nicheScale (ratio)Spatial ecologyEvolutionary biologyHabitatCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patterns of niche divergence and geographical range overlap of closely related species provide insights into the evolutionary dynamics of ecological niches. When ranges overlap, shared selective pressures may preserve niche similarity along coarse-scale macrohabitat axes (e.g., bioclimates). Alternatively, competitive interactions may drive greater divergence along local-scale microhabitat axes (e.g., micro-topographical features). We tested these hypotheses in 16 species pairs of western North American monkeyflowers (Erythranthe and Diplacus, formerly Mimulus) with estimations of species' niches, geographic ranges, and a robust phylogeny. We found that macrohabitat niche divergence decreased with increasing range overlap, consistent with convergent selection operating at a coarse scale. No significant relationship was detected for microhabitat niches. Additionally, niche divergence was greater for recently diverged pairs along all macrohabitat niche axes, but greater for distantly diverged pairs along one microhabitat axis related to vegetation cover. For species pairs with partially overlapping ranges, greater microhabitat divergence was detected in sympatry than in allopatry for at least one niche axis for three of four pairs, consistent with character displacement in sympatry. Thus, coarse- and local-scale niche divergence show dissimilar patterns in relation to range overlap and divergence time, perhaps because the relative importance of convergent versus divergent selection depends on spatial scale.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.681

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvolutionSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207