MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LONG-TERM SIGNAL OF DISTURBANCE:<i>FUCUS GARDNERI</i>AFTER THE<i>EXXON VALDEZ</i>OIL SPILL

2001· article· en· W2062809760 on OpenAlexaff
William B. Driskell, Jennifer L. Ruesink, Dennis C. Lees, Jonathan P. Houghton, Sandra C. Lindstrom

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsSurrey Memorial Hospital
FundersNOAA ResearchNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsFucusIntertidal zoneFucus vesiculosusEcologyEnvironmental scienceQuadratDisturbance (geology)HabitatGrazing pressureFisheryAlgaeOceanographyBiologyGrazingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We followed long-term dynamics of a conspicuous intertidal brown alga, Fucus gardneri, for seven years after the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill (EVOS) in Prince William Sound, Alaska, USA. We compared percent cover of Fucus over time at sites that had been oiled, some of which were washed with high-pressure hot water, relative to sites that had experienced neither oil nor cleanup activities (reference sites). Fucus cover at spill-disturbed sites was initially reduced due to toxic effects of oil and cleanup but rapidly increased to above normal levels and then subsequently dropped in 1994–1995. The changes in cover at spill-disturbed sites were dramatic (≥50% decline year-to-year) and synchronous across all quadrats at a site. In contrast, reference sites demonstrated little synchrony. We examined two possible mechanisms that could generate synchronous fluctuations at spill-disturbed sites, i.e., (1) plant–herbivore coupling, in which limpet or snail grazing would reduce Fucus populations (hypothesis tested by analyzing abundances from 1990 to 1996), and (2) a single cohort of Fucus recruiting soon after the spill that would monopolize space for several years before declining synchronously (hypothesis tested by analyzing size frequency in 1996). We found no evidence for the first mechanism but support for the latter. The persistent patterns in size structure and dynamics in Fucus after EVOS suggest that full recovery had not occurred by 1996, even though Fucus cover at spill-disturbed sites was similar to reference areas within a few years of the spill.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations41
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological ApplicationsSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207