Multiple-batch spawning as a bet-hedging strategy in highly stochastic environments: an exploratory analysis of Atlantic cod
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stochastic environments shape life-history traits and can promote selection for risk-spreading strategies, such as bet-hedging. Although the strategy has often been hypothesised to exist for various species, empirical tests providing firm evidence have been rare, mainly due to the challenge in tracking fitness across generations. Here, we take a ‘proof of principle’ approach to explore whether the reproductive strategy of multiple-batch spawning constitutes a bet-hedging. We used Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) as the study species and parameterised an eco-evolutionary model, using empirical data on size-related reproductive and survival traits. To evaluate the fitness benefits of multiple-batch spawning (within a single breeding period), the mechanistic model separately simulated multiple-batch and single-batch spawning populations under temporally varying environments. We followed the arithmetic and geometric mean fitness associated with both strategies and quantified the mean changes in fitness under several environmental stochasticity levels. We found that, by spreading the environmental risk among batches, multiple-batch spawning increases fitness under fluctuating environmental conditions. The multiple-batch spawning trait is, thus, advantageous and acts as a bet-hedging strategy when the environment is exceptionally unpredictable. Our research identifies an analytically flexible, stochastic, life-history modelling approach to explore the fitness consequences of a risk-spreading strategy and elucidates the importance of evolutionary applications to life-history diversity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".