MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998645566 · doi:10.1515/bot.2004.031

Crusts of the alien bryozoan Membranipora membranacea can negatively impact spore output from native kelps (Laminaria longicruris)

2004· article· en· W1998645566 on OpenAlexafffund
Bettina Saier, Annelise Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueBotanica Marina · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsKelpBiologyKelp forestHoldfastSporeLaminariaAlgaeEcologySaccharinaBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe outbreaks of the crust-forming European bryozoan Membranipora membranacea in northwestern Atlantic waters have caused extensive losses of kelp canopy through a process of defoliation. Here, we report how these crusts may negatively impact kelp beds by reducing spore release from fertile blades. In the laboratory, fully and partially encrusted sori of Laminaria longicruris released significantly fewer spores than bryozoan-free blades. Through field observations, we quantified the potential ecological impact of the encrusting mechanism. Unlike previous years, infestation was minimal in 2002 when only 4% of kelp surface areas were covered with bryozoan colonies (with a maximum of 72% of kelp individuals infested). This indicates strong interannual variability in the scale of impact on kelp spore release. In years when Membranipora encrustation impact is high and coincides with invasion by other nonnative species and/or elevated levels of sea urchin grazing, there is the potential for conversion of the rocky subtidal benthos to a new, possibly stable community state.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanica MarinaSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207