When both isoclines cross, and interspecific competition < intraspecific, the result is:
“Stable coexistence” for when both isoclines cross, and interspecific competition < intraspecific, the result is. This relationship follows from the ecological mechanism represented by the terms in the item, not merely from an association between their names. Species interactions are classified by their net effects on the fitness of each participant, but those effects can change with density, resource supply, life stage, and environmental stress. Competition reduces access to shared limiting factors, whereas predation and parasitism transfer resources from victim to consumer. The remaining alternatives—“Extinction of one species”, “Unstable equilibrium”, “Chaotic growth”—refer to different states, processes, or scales and therefore do not express the same causal relationship. Coexistence requires stabilizing differences that make each species limit itself more strongly than it limits its competitor, or an equalizing process that keeps fitness differences small. Without such mechanisms, persistent competitive asymmetry tends toward exclusion. This distinction matters because similar surface patterns can arise through different mechanisms, whereas ecological prediction depends on identifying the mechanism that actually changes rates.
Ref: Ecology: Concepts and Applications, Molles, 9th Ed., Ch. 13-14