The extent of grazing release from epiphytism for<i>Sargassum muticum</i>(Phaeophyceae) within the invaded range
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overall biotic pressure on a newly introduced species may be less than that experienced within its native range, facilitating invasion. The brown algaSargassum muticum(Yendo) Fensholt is a conspicuous and successful invasive species originally from Japan and China. We comparedS. muticumand native macroalgae with respect to the biotic pressures of mesoherbivore grazing and ectocarpoid fouling. In Strangford Lough, Northern Ireland,S. muticumthalli were as heavily overgrown with seasonal blooms of epiphytic algae as native macroalgal species were. The herbivorous amphipodDexamine spinosawas much more abundant onS. muticumthan on any native macroalga. When cultured with this amphipod,S. muticumlost more tissue than three native macroalgae,Saccharina latissima(Linnaeus) Laneet al.,Halidrys siliquosa(Linnaeus) Lyngbye andFucus serratusLinnaeus.Sargassum muticumcultured with both ectocarpoid fouling and amphipods showed a severe impact, consistent with our previous findings of large declines in the density ofS. muticumobserved in the field during the peak of fouling. Despite being a recent introduction into the macroalgal community in Strangford Lough,S. muticumappears to be under biotic pressure at least equal to that on native species, suggesting that release from grazing and epiphytism does not contribute to the invasiveness of this species in Strangford Lough.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".