MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416131350 · doi:10.1111/1365-2656.70176

An integrated integral projection model ( <scp> IPM <sup>2</sup> </scp> ) to disentangle size‐structured harvest and natural mortality

2025· article· en· W4416131350 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Abigail G. Keller, Benjamin R. Goldstein, Leah Skare, Perry de Valpine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaAdvanced Scientific Computing ResearchCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeOffice of ScienceWashington Sea Grant, University of WashingtonU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of EnergyWashington Department of Fish and WildlifeNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPopulationInferencePopulation sizeProjection (relational algebra)Context (archaeology)Population projectionPopulation growthProjections of population growthAbundance (ecology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Body size is one of the most important traits governing individual‐level demographic rates and modulating population‐level processes. Multiple size‐dependent demographic rates can simultaneously change population structure, so distinguishing their individual contributions to overall population dynamics remains a challenge. Disentangling size‐dependent harvest rates from other demographic rates is critical for assessing the impact of removal on populations of invasive species. Inference about invasive populations can be difficult, however, as observations are often collected opportunistically as part of removal programs, rather than experimentally designed. Yet accurate inference is essential for understanding the feasibility of population suppression and optimising management decisions. We develop an integrated integral projection model (IPM 2 ) that leverages the strengths of the integrated population model and integral projection model to enable inference about complex, size‐structured demographic rates from imperfect observations. We apply the IPM 2 in the context of invasive European green crab ( Carcinus maenas ), a species for which individual body size strongly regulates both the observation‐generating process and latent, population dynamics. The IPM 2 facilitates the distinct estimation of green crab size‐structured harvest and natural mortality rates, parameters for which no explicit data is collected and that are unidentifiable in component datasets of the integrated population model. The model represents how the green crab population changes over time, providing the first estimates of size‐structured abundance of this high‐priority species. By forecasting the stable size distribution and equilibrium population size under varying removal efforts, we demonstrate that extremely high levels of removal effort can reduce the equilibrium green crab population size. Yet these high mortality rates also shift the stable size distribution and increase the equilibrium abundance of smaller crabs, since size‐selective removal alters intraspecific interactions. The ecological outcome of this shift in size structure will be variable, as green crab size modulates only some of its interactions with other species. These results highlight the value of the IPM 2 framework for inferring complex population dynamics with information needs that outpace information in individual observational datasets, providing a path forward for accurate assessment of conservation programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207