MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reconciling differences in trophic control in mid‐latitude marine ecosystems

2006· article· en· W2132644644 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth T. Frank, Brian Petrie, Nancy L. Shackell, Jae S. Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrophic levelEcologyEcosystemMesopredator release hypothesisPopulationEnvironmental scienceMarine ecosystemTrophic cascadeOceanographyApex predatorGeographyBiologyFood webGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dependence of long-term fishery yields on primary productivity, largely based on cross-system comparisons and without reference to the potential dynamic character of this relationship, has long been considered strong evidence for bottom-up control in marine systems. We examined time series of intensive empirical observations from nine heavily exploited regions in the western North Atlantic and find evidence of spatial variance of trophic control. Top-down control dominated in northern areas, the dynamics evolved from bottom-up to top-down in an intermediate region, and bottom-up control governed the southern areas. A simplified, trophic control diagram was developed accounting for top-down and bottom-up forcing within a larger region whose base state dynamics are bottom-up and can accommodate time-varying dynamics. Species diversity and ocean temperature co-varied, being relatively high in southern areas and lower in the north, mirroring the shifting pattern of trophic control. A combination of compensatory population dynamics and accelerated demographic rates in southern areas seems to account for the greater stability of the predator species complex in this region.

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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations221
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207