MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6977583424 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3308934

DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS OF PREDATION BY COMMON EIDERS AND ABIOTIC DISTURBANCE IN AN INTERTIDAL COMMUNITY

2016· other· en· W6977583424 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueFigshare · 2016
Typeother
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIntertidal zonePredationWhelkAbiotic componentInvertebrateAbundance (ecology)Competition (biology)PredatorHabitatSpecies richness

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Predation and disturbance have been well studied in intertidal communities. However, the impact of vertebrate predators, particularly waterfowl, has been only infrequently determined in long-term intertidal studies. Using predator exclusion cages and simulated abiotic disturbance, I studied the direct and indirect effects of predation by Common Eiders (<i>Somateria mollissima</i>) on an intertidal mussel bed community in Passamaquoddy Bay, New Brunswick, Canada. Eiders fed heavily on blue mussels (<i>Mytilus edulis</i>), the dominant invertebrate present, reducing their abundance in “+duck” (exposed to predation) relative to “−duck” (exclosure) plots by nearly 50% within eight months of initiation of the experiment. Based on counts and estimated consumption rates, eiders appeared to be responsible for most predation observed in this system. Although ducks fed heavily on the dominant intertidal invertebrate, they had little effect on species diversity or richness in the community. However, relative abundance of the most common invertebrates did vary. In particular, exclusion of eiders led to an increase in abundance of dogwhelks (<i>Nucella lapillus</i>) one year into the experiment. Whelks, in turn, fed heavily on mussels under cages and obscured the longer-term effect of ducks in the system. This indirect effect appears to be an example of asymmetric exploitation competition, with ducks influencing the food supply of whelks, but whelks having little effect on ducks. When ducks were excluded, whelks were released from this competition and acted as compensating predators. No other indirect effects developed following duck exclusion, presumably due to the increased whelk effect. Disturbance, in contrast, did lead to an increase in species diversity, which later returned to predisturbance levels as the community recovered. Predation delayed the recovery of disturbed sites, because ducks began feeding in these plots before mussel abundance had completely rebounded. Disturbance, while initially deterring predation somewhat, ultimately allowed the effects of predators to persist longer. This interaction of predation and disturbance resulted from compensatory growth of mussels under exclosures in disturbed sites. Mussels protected from eider predation grew quickly after disturbance and rapidly became larger than the preferred prey for whelks. As a consequence, whelks did not feed as heavily on mussels in disturbed sites as in undisturbed sites, where more mussels were of the preferred size, and the observed effect of ducks on mussel biomass persisted. This experiment demonstrates that eiders were significant, and, probably, keystone predators in this system. Eiders directly reduced abundance of mussels, thereby indirectly increasing whelk density in plots where ducks were excluded. Compensatory predation by whelks following duck exclusion blocked other potential indirect effects, thus preventing eiders from having more widespread effects in the system. Such compensatory predation may act to stabilize communities and evidently can occur in relatively simple systems as well as the more species-rich communities with which it is usually associated.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,593
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,996

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,262
Écart entre enseignants0,241 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFigshareMême sujetAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingTravaux en français237 207