MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Climate and density-dependent population dynamics: Lessons from a simple high-Arctic ecosystem

2021· preprint· en· W3153761668 on OpenAlexaff
Dominique Fauteux, Audun Stien, Nigel G. Yoccoz, Eva Fuglei, Rolf A. Ims

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAnimal Ecology and Behavior Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFood webEcosystemPopulation cycleDensity dependencePopulationEcologyHerbivoreArcticClimate changePopulation densityEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyPredationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The strikingly diverse population dynamics of herbivorous small mammals, ranging from high-amplitude, multi-annual cycles to relatively stable dynamics, have puzzled ecologists for a century. Theory predicts that this diversity is shaped by density-dependent food web interactions and stochastic weather events. Recent disrupted cycles through amplitude dampening have been attributed to climate change. However, empirical testing has been hampered by the complexity of the food webs in which these herbivores normally are found. Here we analyze population dynamics of a grazing vole species in a uniquely simple high-Arctic food web without top-down regulation. In accordance with theory, the population dynamics was mostly ruled by overcompensatory density-dependence in winter that without environmental stochasticity would have yielded seasonality driven high-amplitude 2-year cycles. In this simple food web, rain-on-snow events disrupted cyclicity, but not through amplitude dampening. Our case study highlights how food web structure may modify the impact of climate change on population dynamics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesFrench-language works237,207