ArticleRoyal Society open science2020
Mobility and its sensitivity to fitness differences determine consumer-resource distributions.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The dynamics of evolutionary rescue from a novel pathogen threat in a host metapopulation.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An animal's movement rate (mobility) and its ability to perceive fitness gradients (fitness sensitivity) determine how well it can exploit resources. Previous models have examined mobility and fitness sensitivity separately and found that mobility, modelled as random movement, prevents animals from staying in high-quality patches, leading to a departure from an ideal free distribution (IFD). However, empirical work shows that animals with higher mobility can more effectively collect environmental information and better sense patch quality, especially when the environment is frequently changed by human activities. Here, we model, for the first time, this positive correlation between mobility and fitness sensitivity and measure its consequences for the populations of a consumer and its resource. In the absence of consumer demography, mobility alone had no effect on system equilibria, but a positive correlation between mobility and fitness sensitivity could produce an IFD. In the presence of consumer demography, lower levels of mobility prevented the system from approaching an IFD due to the mixing of consumers between patches. However, when positively correlated with fitness sensitivity, high mobility led to an IFD. Our study demonstrates that the expected covariation of animal movement attributes can drive broadly theorized consumer-resource patterns across space and time and could underlie the role of consumers in driving spatial heterogeneity in resource abundance.
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.