Disentangling controls on animal abundance: Prey availability, thermal habitat, and microhabitat structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The question of what controls animal abundance has always been fundamental to ecology, but given rapid environmental change, understanding the drivers and mechanisms governing abundance is more important than ever. Here, we determine how multidimensional environments and niches interact to determine population abundance along a tropical habitat gradient. Focusing on the endemic lizard Anolis bicaorum on the island of Utila (Honduras), we evaluate direct and indirect effects of three interacting niche axes on abundance: thermal habitat quality, structural habitat quality, and prey availability. We measured A. bicaorum abundance across a series of thirteen plots and used N‐mixture models and path analysis to disentangle direct and indirect effects of these factors. Results showed that thermal habitat quality and prey biomass both had positive direct effects on anole abundance. However, thermal habitat quality also influenced prey biomass, leading to a strong indirect effect on abundance. Thermal habitat quality was primarily a function of canopy density, measured as leaf area index (LAI). Despite having little direct effect on abundance, LAI had a strong overall effect mediated by thermal quality and prey biomass. Our results demonstrate the role of multidimensional environments and niche interactions in determining animal abundance and highlight the need to consider interactions between thermal niches and trophic interactions to understand variation in abundance, rather than focusing solely on changes in the physical environment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".