Agricultural Food Subsidies, Migratory Connectivity and Large-Scale Disturbance in Arctic Coastal Systems: A Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An allochthonous input can modify trophic relationships, by providing an external resource that is normally limiting within a system. The subsidy may not only elicit a growth response of the primary producers via a bottom-up effect, but it also may lead to runaway herbivore growth in the absence of increased predation. If the consumer is migratory and predation is similarly dampened in the alternative system, the increased numbers may produce a top-down cascade of direct and indirect effects on an ecosystem that may be a great distance from the source of the subsidy. In an extreme case, it can lead to a catastrophic shift in ecosystem functioning as a result of biotic exploitation that produces an alternative stable state. The loss of resilience is particularly sensitive to herbivore density which can result in two different outcomes to the vegetation on which the consumer feeds. Over-compensatory growth of above-ground biomass gives way to sward destruction and near irreversible changes in soil properties as density of a herbivore increases. A striking temporal asymmetry exists between a reduction in the consumer population and recovery of damaged vegetation and degraded soils.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".