Variable and complementary effects of herbivores on different life stages of bloom-forming macroalgae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased nutrient loading favors macroalgal blooms in eutrophied coastal ecosystems. The main counteracting factor on this bottom-up support is top-down control by consumers. We asked (1) whether herbivore control on 2 bloom-forming macroalgae in the Baltic Sea varies between different algal life stages, (2) whether herbivores selectively feed on Enterornorpha spp. (Chlorophyceae) thereby supporting dominance of PiZayella littoralis (Phaeophyceae), and (3) whether various herbivore species differ in their effects. In comparative field and laboratory experiments, we analyzed herbivore pressure and selectivity on germling density and adult thalli of Enterornorpha spp. and P. littoralis. In the field, herbivores reduced macroalgal recruitment by 80 % within 14 d indicating strong herbivore control at early life stages. Recruits of Enterornorpha spp. were significantly preferred over P, littoralis Adult thalli of both algae showed similar growth rates, but grazing rates were significantly higher on Enterornorpha spp. In laboratory experiments, Idotea chelipes (lsopoda), Littorina saxatilis (Gastropoda) and Garnmarus locusta (Amphipoda) strongly reduced germling density, whereas effects of L. littorea were weak. I. chelipes and L. saxatilis significantly preferred gerrnlings of Enterornorpha spp. over P. littoralis. I. chelipes had strong effects on adult Enterornorpha spp. but not on P, littoralis. The effects of G. locusta and L. littorea on both adult algae were smaller and not selective, and L. saxatilis did not feed on adults at all. Different herbivore feeding modes are discussed. We conclude that strong and selective herbivory on juvenile and adult Enterornorpha spp. favors dominance of P. littoralis in the Baltic. An effective control of macroalgal blooms in eutrophied areas can be supported by sustaining high herbivore density and species richness considering the variable and complementary effects of different herbivore species on different algal life stages.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 teacher head, 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".