ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020
Individual differences determine the strength of ecological interactions.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Smaller is better in competition for space.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Pathways to global-change effects on biodiversity: new opportunities for dynamically forecasting demography and species interactions.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Four key challenges in the open-data revolution.The Journal of animal ecology · 2021Article
- Individual differences determine the strength of ecological interactions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biotic interactions are central to both ecological and evolutionary dynamics. In the vast majority of empirical studies, the strength of intraspecific interactions is estimated by using simple measures of population size. Biologists have long known that these are crude metrics, with experiments and theory suggesting that interactions between individuals should depend on traits, such as body size. Despite this, it has been difficult to estimate the impact of traits on competitive ability from ecological field data, and this explains why the strength of biotic interactions has empirically been treated in a simplistic manner. Using long-term observational data from four different populations, we show that large Trinidadian guppies impose a significantly larger competitive pressure on conspecifics than individuals that are smaller; in other words, competition is asymmetric. When we incorporate this asymmetry into integral projection models, the predicted size structure is much closer to what we see in the field compared with models where competition is independent of body size. This difference in size structure translates into a twofold difference in reproductive output. This demonstrates how the nature of ecological interactions drives the size structure, which, in turn, will have important implications for both the ecological and evolutionary dynamics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.