Key differences in photosynthetic characteristics of nine species of intertidal macroalgae are related to their position on the shore
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study of the fluorescence characteristics, net photosynthetic rate, and dark respiration of nine species of intertidal macroalgae, from three divisions and from different positions on a rocky shore on the east coast of Scotland, was carried out to address the following questions: (i) Do algae at different positions along the shore respond differently to the stresses at these positions in terms of photosynthetic efficiency, net photosynthetic rate, and respiration, when fully hydrated? (ii) Do algal species at different positions respond differently, in terms of function, to desiccation, and can these responses be correlated with tolerance or intolerance to desiccation in terms of recovery? The present study demonstrated that algal species that occur higher on the shore have greater photosynthetic rates, respiration rates, maximum fluorescence / initial fluorescence ratios, and photosynthetic efficiencies while fully hydrated than do species that live lower on the shore. These findings point towards an increase in time-use efficiency in species that have less time available for productivity or nutrient uptake, since species at a greater height on the shore spend less time in a state of sufficient hydration to photosynthesize. Furthermore, algae higher up the shore, which can recover from desiccation, have significantly different fluorescence characteristics from nonrecoverers, particularly in the area above the Kautsky curve between initial fluorescence and maximum fluorescence. This is the first biophysical evidence relating to a mechanism for desiccation tolerance in macroalgae, and it is discussed within the context of other examples of increasing rates of physiological processes with decreasing time.Key words: fluorescence, zonation, function, rocky shore, Fucus.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".