MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034916123 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1004519107

Replenishment of fish populations is threatened by ocean acidification

2010· article· en· W2034916123 on OpenAlexaff
Philip L. Munday, Danielle L. Dixson, Mark I. McCormick, Mark G. Meekan, Maud C. O. Ferrari, Douglas P. Chivers

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Acidification Effects and Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationOcean acidificationThreatened speciesBiologyPopulationEcologyCoral reef fishEcosystemMarine ecosystemHabitatCoral reefLarvaFisheryClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing concern that ocean acidification, caused by the uptake of additional CO(2) at the ocean surface, could affect the functioning of marine ecosystems; however, the mechanisms by which population declines will occur have not been identified, especially for noncalcifying species such as fishes. Here, we use a combination of laboratory and field-based experiments to show that levels of dissolved CO(2) predicted to occur in the ocean this century alter the behavior of larval fish and dramatically decrease their survival during recruitment to adult populations. Altered behavior of larvae was detected at 700 ppm CO(2), with many individuals becoming attracted to the smell of predators. At 850 ppm CO(2), the ability to sense predators was completely impaired. Larvae exposed to elevated CO(2) were more active and exhibited riskier behavior in natural coral-reef habitat. As a result, they had 5-9 times higher mortality from predation than current-day controls, with mortality increasing with CO(2) concentration. Our results show that additional CO(2) absorbed into the ocean will reduce recruitment success and have far-reaching consequences for the sustainability of fish populations.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations464
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicOcean Acidification Effects and ResponsesFrench-language works237,207