MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201761334 · doi:10.1101/2021.09.29.462284

The evolutionary maintenance of Lévy flight foraging

2021· preprint· en· W3201761334 on OpenAlexafffund
Winston Campeau, Andrew M. Simons, Brett Stevens

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDiffusion and Search Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersUniversity of TorontoGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsForagingLévy flightOptimal foraging theoryEcologyBiologyTraitSelection (genetic algorithm)PopulationNatural selectionNicheFitness landscapeRandom walkStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Lévy flight is a type of random walk that models the behaviour of many phenomena across a multiplicity of academic disciplines; within biology specifically, the behaviour of fish, birds, insects, mollusks, bacteria, plants, slime molds, t-cells, and human populations. The Lévy flight foraging hypothesis states that because Lévy flights can maximize an organism’s search efficiency, natural selection should result in Lévy-like behaviour. Empirical and theoretical research has provided ample evidence of Lévy walks in both extinct and extant species, and its efficiency across models with a diversity of resource distributions. However, no model has addressed the maintenance of Lévy flight foraging through evolutionary processes, and existing models lack ecological breadth. We use numerical simulations, including lineage-based models of evolution with a distribution of move lengths as a variable and heritable trait, to test the Lévy flight foraging hypothesis. We include biological and ecological contexts such as population size, searching costs, lifespan, resource distribution, speed, and consider both energy accumulated at the end of a lifespan and averaged over a lifespan. We demonstrate that selection often results in Lévy-like behaviour, although conditional; smaller populations, longer searches, and low searching costs increase the fitness of Lévy-like behaviour relative to Brownian behaviour. Interestingly, our results also evidence a bet-hedging strategy; Lévy-like behaviour reduces fitness variance, thus maximizing geometric mean fitness over multiple generations. Author summary In heterotrophs, incuding animals, survival depends on the net energy gained through foraging. The expectation, then, is that natural selection results in adaptations for efficient foraging that optimize the balance of searching costs and rewards. Lévy flight foraging has been proposed as an optimal foraging solution. The hypothesis states, if no information about resource locations are available, and the locations are re-visitable, then selection will result in adaptations for Lévy flight foraging, a type of random walk. It has been argued that Levy-like foraging behaviour may simply reflect how resources are distributed, but empirical and theoretical research suggests that this behaviour is intrinsic or innate. However, this research does not address evolutionary mechanisms, and lacks ecological breadth. We extend the current theoretical framework by including evolutionary ecological contexts. We treat an organism’s random walk as a heritable trait, and explore ecological contexts such as population size, lifespan, carrying capacity, searching costs, reproductive strategies, and different distributions of food. Our evolutionary simulations overwhelmingly resulted in selection for Lévy-like foraging, regardless of the distribution of food, and evidences Lévy flight foraging as a bet-hedging strategy. Thus, here we provide some of the first evidence for the evolutionary maintenance of Lévy flight foraging.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicDiffusion and Search DynamicsFrench-language works237,207