DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF SEDIMENTS ON SURVIVAL AND GROWTH OF <i>FUCUS SERRATUS</i> EMBRYOS (FUCALES, PHAEOPHYCEAE)<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recruitment of seaweeds through small reproductive stages is limited on sediment inundated rocky shores and largely unsuccessful in soft sediment environments. Burial in sediment has several potentially negative effects for seaweed propagules, and these effects were differentiated in a laboratory experiment. We investigated how light deprivation, sediment type (grain size, organic content, and origin), and sediment chemistry (oxygen presence and toxicity through hydrogen sulfide) affected survivorship and growth of Fucus serratus L. embryos. Presence of hydrogen sulfide had overriding negative impacts on both survivorship and growth of Fucus embryos, independently of sediment type and light availability. In contrast, simple anaerobiosis generally did not impair survival or growth of the embryos. Fine sediments, 3 mm thick, significantly reduced embryo survivorship, presumably through accumulation of metabolic waste products in the immediate vicinity of the embryos as a consequence of constrained diffusion. This effect was equally pronounced in the presence of a 1‐mm layer of organically rich biodeposits. Irradiance levels did not affect survival of embryos but influenced growth. Decreasing thickness and increasing coarseness of sediments together represented a gradient of enhanced light penetration and diffusion. Growth of embryos increased along this gradient. In nature, soft sediment environments with organically enriched muds (e.g. tidal flats and salt marshes) represent habitats least favorable for colonization through small reproductive stages of seaweeds.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".