ArticleEcology2026
Second-order elasticities for ecology and evolution: Unraveling nonlinear fitness responses to perturbations.
Article in Ecology, 2026. 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.
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
Abstract
In ecology and evolutionary biology, understanding the relationship between vital rates (e.g., survival, development, reproduction) and population growth is essential to elucidate how life history strategies are shaped by natural selection. Yet most established demographic methods rely on linear assumptions that rank the importance of vital rates but are insensitive to whether the returns of the population growth rate are diminishing or accelerating. Here, we introduce the second-order elasticities of mean individual fitness in the population, the S-elasticity. The S-elasticity is a proportional, element-wise measure that can quantify the curvature of mean individual fitness with respect to single matrix population model (MPM) elements (self S-elasticity) and to pairs of elements (mixed S-elasticity). S-elasticities (1) classify concavity versus convexity of local fitness surfaces, (2) provide a relative-curvature diagnostic by scaling second-order to first-order effects, (3) sum to zero across elements-facilitating comparisons across populations and species-and (4) connect fitness curvature to biologically feasible trade-offs via the elasticity ratio K. We provide a simple inequality based on the S-elasticities and the K-ratio that detects local fitness peaks along constraint directions corresponding to each pair of matrix elements. We illustrate the framework with an average 4 × 4 MPM for Didelphis aurita (Marsupialia, Didelphidae) and compare our results to classical second-order derivatives of population growth rate applied to the same dataset. First-order elasticities identify survival of weaned and subadult survival as dominant linear levers of fitness; their negative self S-elasticities reveal diminishing returns for increases and amplified losses for decreases relative to linear expectations. Mixed S-elasticities expose a costly trade-off between survival of weaned and aged females' fertility: The curvature-only surface is concave near the baseline and the trade-off direction is a local peak, whereas several other element pairs lie along flatter, more substitutable directions. Together, S-elasticities provide a compact diagnostic for when linear rankings suffice, when nonlinearity dominates, and where feasible substitutions are most constrained. Because they are proportional, additive (sum-to-zero), and rooted in life cycle pathways, S-elasticities complement classic elasticity and make second-order demographic information directly comparable across systems-yielding actionable guidance for evolutionary inference and for prioritizing management actions under realistic trade-offs.
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.