Size‐dependence of food intake and mortality interact with temperature and seasonality to drive diversity in fish life histories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding how growth and reproduction will adapt to changing environmental conditions is a fundamental question in evolutionary ecology, but predicting the responses of specific taxa is challenging. Analyses of the physiological effects of climate change upon life history evolution rarely consider alternative hypothesized mechanisms, such as size-dependent foraging and the risk of predation, simultaneously shaping optimal growth patterns. To test for interactions between these mechanisms, we embedded a state-dependent energetic model in an ecosystem size-spectrum to ask whether prey availability (foraging) and risk of predation experienced by individual fish can explain observed diversity in life histories of fishes. We found that asymptotic growth emerged from size-based foraging and reproductive and mortality patterns in the context of ecosystem food web interactions. While more productive ecosystems led to larger body sizes, the effects of temperature on metabolic costs had only small effects on size. To validate our model, we ran it for abiotic scenarios corresponding to the ecological lifestyles of three tuna species, considering environments that included seasonal variation in temperature. We successfully predicted realistic patterns of growth, reproduction, and mortality of all three tuna species. We found that individuals grew larger when environmental conditions varied seasonally, and spawning was restricted to part of the year (corresponding to their migration from temperate to tropical waters). Growing larger was advantageous because foraging and spawning opportunities were seasonally constrained. This mechanism could explain the evolution of gigantism in temperate tunas. Our approach addresses variation in food availability and individual risk as well as metabolic processes and offers a promising approach to understand fish life-history responses to changing ocean conditions.
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".