A temperature‐driven model of phenological mismatch provides insights into the potential impacts of climate change on consumer–resource interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anthropogenic climate change increasingly affects species phenology. Because trophic interactions often occur at specific phenological stages, changes in one species' phenology may affect others through phenological mismatch. When a consumer and a resource both exhibit a seasonal resting period, the synchrony of the end of their respective resting periods is fundamental for the persistence of their interaction. Since the consumer and its resource may react differently to changes in temperature regime, the synchrony between them could be altered. We investigate potential effects of climate change on species' synchrony. We propose a general model that determines the duration of the resting period according to temperature, and its effects on the mismatch between phenological stages of two interacting species. We illustrate our approach using the spruce budworm–balsam fir system in eastern Canada. We find that an increase in temperature advances the end of the resting period. However, the effects of a warm or cold spell during the resting period strongly vary according to the timing and the duration of the spell. Depending on how a consumer and its resource react to the same temperature shift, the mismatch between them may increase or decrease. The spruce budworm–balsam fir model predicts that an increase in temperature may increase the mismatch between the insect and the tree in southern sites, but may increase the synchrony in northern sites. This modelling approach is of prime importance to investigate potential effects of climate change on consumer–resource systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 teacher head, 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".