Species conflict at Earth’s edges – Contests, climate, and coveted resources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Direct conflict between species is an infrequently witnessed biological phenomenon. Potential drivers of such contests can include climate change, especially at Earth’s high elevation and latitudinal extremes where temperatures warm 2–5 times faster than elsewhere and hydro-geomorphic processes such as glacial recession and soil erosion affect species access to abiotic resources. We addressed a component of this broader issue by empirical assessments of mammalian conflict over access to four abiotic resources – minerals, water, snow, and shade – by annotation of past studies and by empirical data collection. Evidence for Nearctic and Palearctic mammals indicates that when desert waters are in short supply, contests intensify, generally favoring larger species regardless of their status as native or exotic. Our empirical data indicate that contests between two large and approximately similarly-sized mammals – mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus) and bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) – along a 2,500 km gradient at three high-altitude (above tree-line) sites in the Rocky Mountains of North America, result in striking asymmetries; goats dominated > 95% of interactions. Despite far fewer observations of encounters to access shade or snow patches, an increasingly prominent dialog needs to be held about rarely explored biological phenomena where less is known than we might otherwise presume, whether induced by climate or increasing anthropological alteration because of underpinnings to understand community structure and conservation planning. Observations on the frequency and intensity by which individuals escalate behavior to access abiotic resources remains an underappreciated arena to help identify the proximate importance of scarcity in the natural environment. Notwithstanding Darwin’s prediction some 165 years ago that populations in extreme environments (high-latitude, high-altitude) are more likely to be impacted by abiotic variables than biotic, conflict between species may be reflective of climate degradation coupled with the changing nature of coveted resources.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".