ArticleEcology2026
Defense-competition trade-offs shape prey eco-evolutionary dynamics across environmental gradients.
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
Predators can affect ecological communities not only through direct consumption but also by indirectly triggering costly defensive responses in prey that cascade through food webs. Understanding how prey navigate the competing demands of predation pressure and resource exploitation is thus central to predicting ecological (i.e., persistence) and evolutionary (i.e., adaptation) dynamics. Drawing on niche theory and the influence of keystone predators, this study investigates how variation in resource availability drives the persistence and evolution of prey with diverse trait combinations balancing defensive and competitive traits. At the heart of this ecological puzzle lies a fundamental constraint: Defended prey inherently have lower competitive abilities, generating a trade-off that governs fitness success along environmental gradients. Using a mathematical model, we show that the shape of the defense-competitiveness trade-off (i.e., the magnitude of change of competitiveness costs with increasing defense) influences the persistence of prey populations and the evolution of prey competitive and defensive traits. Strong trade-offs (i.e., when defenses strongly reduce competitiveness) or neutral trade-offs (i.e., when gains in defense and losses in competitiveness change proportionally) favor competitiveness, while weak trade-offs (i.e., when defenses weakly affect competitiveness) favor defensive traits, especially in resource-rich environments. In resource-poor environments, however, competitive prey are predominantly favored. Coexistence among prey individuals with different resource allocation strategies is evolutionarily unstable, as our model revealed that evolutionary processes eroded the persistence of multiple prey strategies. By linking resource availability to prey trait evolution, this study highlights the environmental dependence of eco-evolutionary dynamics in food webs, offering insights into the complex interactions that drive the prevalence and evolution of defense strategies.
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.