Using Foraminifera as Indicators of Habitat Recovery following Remediation of Sheltered Tidal Flats in Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After nearly 20 years of limited natural recovery of intertidal habitats along the Gulf Coast of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, large-scale remediation projects were conducted on approximately 1800 ha of tidal flat and salt marsh habitat. In Fall, 2011, multiple passes of mechanical tilling were used to break up oiled cohesive sediment layer across a heavily degraded sand tidal flat, to reduce subsurface liquid oil, and accelerate natural recovery. Rates and degrees of test deformities in three foram genera were measured from samples collected at degraded and healthy sand tidal flat sites. Dominant genera and rates of test deformity at a heavily oiled sand tidal flat (average surface and subsurface total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) = 10,000 ppm ) were: Peneroplis (41.0%), Ammonia (38.7%), Elphidium (54.7%). Rates of deformity in the same three genera collected at a healthy sand tidal flat habitat were: Peneroplis (11.8%), Ammonia (7.5%), Elphidium (13.9%). Nearly two years after the remediation event, results indicate a decreasing trend in percent foram deformities at the remediation site, which suggests oil toxicity as an ecological stressor has decreased as a result of remediation activities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".