Herbivory and community organization on a subtidal cobble bed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the role of molluscan mesograzers (periwinkles Littorina littorea, limpets Testudinalia testudinalis and chitons Ischnochiton ruber) in mediating macroalgal succession after a mass mortality of sea urchins Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis in a subtidal cobble bed in Nova Scotia, Canada. Experimental exclusions of mesograzers from cobbles encrusted with smooth (Phymatolithon) or rugose (Lithothamnion) coralline algae resulted in the establishment of a variety of ephemeral filamentous algae, suggesting that these small (2 to 5 mm) but abundant herbivores are the dominant agents controlling early succession and community organization in this habitat. In removing inhibitive effects of early successional species, molluscan grazing facilitated the establishment of fleshy perennial species Fucus evanescens and Chondrus crispus, which occasionally escaped grazing at small size to attain a growth refuge on the cobbles. Algal biomass and species richness were greater on Lithothamnion than Phymatolithon, suggesting that rugose crusts provide more favourable microhabitats for recruitment or survival of various macroalgae. The distribution of mesograzers differed between coralline types, likely influencing the rate and intensity of grazing: periwinkles foraged on both types of crust, whereas limpets Occurred primarily on Phymatolithon and chitons on Lithothamnion. All non-coralline algae were consumed when urchins were experimentally reintroduced to the cobble bed, returning the assemblage to the urchin barrens 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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".