MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214821037 · doi:10.1111/oik.08892

Movement with meaning: integrating information into meta‐ecology

2022· article· en· W4214821037 on OpenAlexafffund
Chelsea J. Little, Matteo Rizzuto, Thomas M. Luhring, Julia D. Monk, Robert J. Nowicki, Rachel E. Paseka, James Stegen, Celia C. Symons, Frieda B. Taub, Jian D. L. Yen

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of British Columbia
FundersPacific Northwest National LaboratoryNational Socio-Environmental Synthesis CenterBattelleMote Marine Laboratory and AquariumBiological and Environmental ResearchUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnKillam TrustsU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEcologyEcosystemTrophic levelEnergy flowEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEnergy (signal processing)Environmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluxes of matter, energy and information over space and time contribute to ecosystems' functioning and stability. The meta‐ecosystem framework addresses the dynamics of ecosystems linked by these fluxes but, to date, has focused solely on energy and matter. Here, we synthesize existing knowledge of information's effects on local and connected ecosystems and demonstrate how new hypotheses emerge from the integration of ecological information into meta‐ecosystem theory. We begin by defining information and reviewing how it flows among ecosystems to affect connectivity, local ecosystem function and meta‐ecosystem dynamics. We focus on the role of semiotic information: that which can reduce an individual's – or a group's – uncertainty about the state of the world. Semiotic information elicits behavioral, developmental and life history responses from organisms, potentially leading to fitness consequences. Organisms' responses to information can ripple through trophic interactions to influence ecosystem processes, their local and regional dynamics, and the spatiotemporal flows of energy and matter, therefore information should affect meta‐ecosystem dynamics such as stability and productivity. While specific subdisciplines of ecology currently consider different types of information (e.g. social and cultural information, natural and artificial light or sound, body condition, genotype and phenotype), many ecological models currently account for neither the spatio–temporal distribution of information nor its perception by organisms. We identify the empirical, theoretical and philosophical challenges in developing a robust information meta‐ecology and offer ways to overcome them. Finally, we present new hypotheses for how accounting for realistic information perception and responses by organisms could impact processes such as home range formation and spatial insurance, and thus our understanding of ecological dynamics across spatial and temporal scales. Accounting for information will be essential to understanding how dynamics such as fitness, organismal movement and trophic interactions influence meta‐ecosystem functioning, and predicting how ecosystem processes are affected by anthropogenic pressures.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207