Anthropogenic structures and the infiltration of natural benthos by invasive ascidians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anthropogenic habitats such as marinas and docks are focal points for marine invasions, but relatively little is known about the infiltration of nearby natural habitats by these invaders. To address infiltration by four geographically widespread ascidian invaders, we used a two‐step approach: (i) a field survey with equitable sampling in adjacent artificial and natural habitats in British Columbia, Canada, and (ii) a literature review, to infer larger scale patterns across species’ introduced global ranges. Our field survey revealed differential distribution patterns among the four ascidians recorded, with infiltration of natural rocky habitats by two species, Botrylloides violaceus and Botryllus schlosseri. We did not record Didemnum vexillum or Styela clava in natural habitats, though they were both recorded on adjacent artificial structures. Globally, these ascidian species are predominantly found associated with anthropogenic habitats including floating docks, pilings and aquaculture installations, but they have infiltrated natural habitats in some areas of their introduced range. The factors contributing to infiltration of nearby natural benthic habitats remains unclear, but determining which mechanisms are important for encouraging or hindering the establishment and spread of nonindigenous species beyond artificial structures requires survey and experimental work beyond anthropogenic habitats. Such work will aid our understanding of marine introduction dynamics, invasiveness, and associated management implications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".