Resource and seasonality drive interspecific variability in simulations from a dynamic energy budget model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Animals show a vast array of phenotypic traits in time and space. Such variation patterns have traditionally been described as ecogeographical rules; for example, the tendency of size and clutch size to increase with latitude (Bergmann's and Lack's rules, respectively). Despite considerable research into these variation patterns and their consequences for biodiversity and conservation, the processes behind trait variation remain controversial. Here, we show how food variability, largely set by climate and weather, can drive interspecific trait variation by determining individual energy input and allocation trade-offs. Using a dynamic energy budget (DEB) model, we simulated different food environments, as well as interspecific variability in the parameters for energy assimilation, mobilization and allocation to soma. We found that interspecific variability is greater when the resource is non-limiting in both constant and seasonal environments. Our findings further show that individuals can reach larger biomass and greater reproductive output in a seasonal environment than in a constant environment of equal average resource due to the peaks of food surplus. Our results agree with the classical patterns of interspecific trait variation and provide a mechanistic understanding that supports recent hypotheses which explain them: the resource and the eNPP (net primary production during the growing season) rules. Due to the current alterations to ecosystems and communities, disentangling the mechanisms of trait variation is increasingly important to understand and predict biodiversity dynamics under climate change, as well as to improve conservation strategies.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".