Length–biomass allometry in primary producers: predominantly bidimensional seaweeds differ from the “universal” interspecific trend defined by microalgae and vascular plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study tests whether the value (0.25, or 1/4) of the interspecific allometric exponent currently thought to be universal for the length–biomass relationship for primary producers (based on data for vascular plants and unicellular microalgae) also applies to macroalgae. Length and dry biomass were measured for four phylogenetically distinct seaweed species, Chondrus crispus Stackhouse, Pterocladiella capillacea (Gmelin) Santelices & Hommersand, Fucus vesiculosus Linnaeus, and Laminaria saccharina (Linnaeus) J.V. Lamouroux, which are representatives of four different orders: Gigartinales and Gelidiales (Rhodophyta) and Fucales and Laminariales (Phaeophyceae). The interspecific exponent found for these seaweeds (0.47) differs significantly from the interspecific “universal” value stated above. The 95% confidence interval for the interspecific exponent for these seaweeds includes 0.5 (or 1/2), a value that is related to an idealized form of bidimensional growth. While vascular plants and unicellular microalgae can be viewed as clearly growing in three dimensions, the studied seaweeds are predominantly flat, which thus seems to explain their divergent allometry. The present study indicates that the comprehensive understanding of allometric trends for primary producers should be based on studies covering the morphological diversity that different groups of primary producers display.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".