Niche conservation in copepods between ocean basins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Niche conservatism is the hypothesis that a species' niche remains stable in space and time. This concept is central to understanding phenomena ranging from the role of climate change impacts on species biogeography to community dynamics. Marine zooplankton have been used as indicators of global change in the ocean, and niche conservatism is usually assumed for these organisms due to their high dispersal capacity, which may limit the development of local adaptations. However, recent evidence suggests that several zooplankton species with a circumglobal distribution are comprised of several cryptic species complexes, but it is unknown if the niches of cryptic species complexes have remained conserved or if they have diverged. Habitat management based on niche modelling would be strengthened by better understanding patterns of niche conservation or divergence, as the usual assumption that species have fixed environmental niches may be misleading. We assess the niche differences for 15 copepod species with populations in the North Atlantic, Southern Ocean and Australia. Pairwise differences in the realised niches were computed for each species using two complementary analyses. Our analysis indicates that global‐scale niche modelling of zooplankton cannot assume niche conservatism across all lineages and future studies should look to incorporate phylogenetic information to improve future niche estimates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".