The Interspecific Abundance–Occupancy Relationship in Invertebrate Metacommunities Associated with Intertidal Mussel Patches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To explain the distribution and abundance of species, ecology searches for general models. A pattern often encountered in nature is the interspecific abundance–occupancy relationship (AOR), which describes how the mean local abundance of species relates to the proportion of local sites that each species occupies. Both are central variables in ecology and are often positively correlated, although exceptions have been found. As most AOR research has been conducted with terrestrial systems, recent studies are testing for its occurrence in marine systems. This contribution tests the AOR for invertebrate metacommunities associated with intertidal mussel patches. Using data from six coastal locations in Nova Scotia (Canada), this study shows that the negative binomial model properly describes the relationship between abundance and occupancy for these systems. The degree of wave exposure (wave-sheltered versus wave-exposed habitats) had some influence on the shape of the AOR. Overall, these findings extend the applicability of the AOR to intertidal invertebrate metacommunities. The raw data are included as part of this article to help future syntheses on the AOR, which will need data for a variety of terrestrial and aquatic environments.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".