Data and scripts from: Experimental evidence of size-selective harvest and environmental stochasticity effects on population demography, fluctuations, and nonlinearity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theory and analyses of fisheries datasets indicate that harvesting can alter population structure and destabilize nonlinear processes, which increases population fluctuations. We conducted a factorial experiment on the population dynamics of Daphnia magna in relation to size-selective harvesting and stochasticity of food supply. Harvesting and stochasticity treatments both increased population fluctuations. Timeseries analysis indicated that fluctuations in control populations were nonlinear, and nonlinearity increased substantially in response to harvesting. Both harvesting and stochasticity induced population juvenescence, but harvesting did so via depletion of adults whereas stochasticity increased the abundance of juveniles. A fitted fisheries model indicated that harvesting shifted populations towards higher reproductive rates and larger-magnitude damped oscillations that amplify demographic noise. These findings provide experimental evidence that harvesting increases nonlinearity of population fluctuations and that both harvesting and stochasticity increase population variability and juvenescence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".