Variation in developmental time affects mating success and Allee effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A fundamental question in biological conservation and invasion biology is why do some populations go extinct? Allee effects, notably those caused by mate location failure, are potentially key factors leading to the extinction of sparse populations. Several previous studies have focused on the inability of males and females to locate each other in space when populations are at low densities but here we investigate the effects of differences in the timing of male and female maturation on mating success. We develop a generalized model to clarify the role of protandry (the appearance of males before female emergence) and variability in adult maturation times. We show that temporal asynchrony can substantially reduce the probability of successful mating. We then apply this generalized model to estimate mating success in invading populations of the gypsy moth in North America in relation to local climate and its associated seasonality. Considerable geographic heterogeneity was observed in simulated mating success and this variability was not correlated with previous evaluations of bioclimatic requirements and habitat suitability. Furthermore, we found that the generalized model of temporal asynchrony provided reliable predictions and that detailed modeling of gypsy moth development was not necessary.
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) | 0.000 | 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".