Effects of habitat complexity and predator exclusion on the abundance of juvenile red snapper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predator exclusion and habitat complexity factors that may affect juvenile red snapper Lutjanus campechanus habitat selection were examined in field and laboratory experiments. A significant predator exclusion effect was detected. Uncaged shell habitats showed significantly lower numbers of age 0 year red snapper, and both uncaged shell and block‐shell habitats showed significantly lower numbers of age 1 year red snapper compared with caged habitats ( P < 0·001). Habitat complexity also affected age 0 year red snapper, as mean abundance significantly decreased with decreased habitat complexity ( P < 0·001). In the laboratory, age 0 year red snapper association with complex habitats significantly increased with exposure to a predator Gulf flounder Paralichthys albigutta ( P < 0·001). This study showed that predator exclusion and habitat complexity were significant factors that affected the abundance of juvenile red snapper in nursery areas of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Predation may affect juvenile red snapper abundance directly through mortality and indirectly by influencing habitat selection.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".