MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164290263 · doi:10.1038/s42003-021-02172-4

A natural constant predicts survival to maximum age

2021· article· en· W3164290263 on OpenAlexafffund
Manuel Dureuil, Rainer Froese

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsAtlantic Industries (Canada)Dalhousie University
FundersBundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, nukleare Sicherheit und VerbraucherschutzCanada First Research Excellence FundOcean Frontier InstituteBundesamt für NaturschutzGEOMAR Helmholtz-Zentrum für Ozeanforschung Kiel
KeywordsCohortDemographyRange (aeronautics)AgeingCohort effectMortality rateBiologyEmpirical evidenceEcologyStatisticsMathematicsGeneticsSociologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information about the survival of species is important in many ecological applications. Yet, the estimation of a species' natural mortality rate M remains a major problem in the management and conservation of wild populations, often circumvented by applying empirical equations that relate mortality to other traits that are more easily observed. We show that mean adult M can be approximated from the general law of decay if the average maximum age reached by individuals in a cohort is known. This is possible because the proportion P of individuals surviving to the average maximum age in a cohort is surprisingly similar across a wide range of examined species at 1.5%. The likely reason for the narrow range of P is a universal increase in the rate of mortality near the end of life, providing strong evidence that the evolutionary theories of ageing are the norm in natural 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.279
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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207