MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165328796 · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0034

Predatory fishes affect trophic cascades and apparent competition in temperate reefs

2010· article· en· W2165328796 on OpenAlexaff
Alejandro Frid, Jeff Marliave

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Aquarium
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRockfishBiologyMesopredator release hypothesisTrophic levelSebastesTrophic cascadeEcologyScorpaenidaePredationShrimpApex predatorFisheryFood webFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We provide evidence for a trophic cascade involving apex predators and mesopredators of marine temperate reefs, lingcod and rockfish, respectively. We measured spatio-temporal variation in the relative abundance of lingcod, subadult rockfish and two shrimp groups eaten by rockfish (Pandalus sp. and three smaller-bodied genera aggregated). Lingcod had an indirect positive effect on shrimps, as mediated by the direct negative effects of lingcod on rockfish and of rockfish on shrimps. These top-down effects on shrimps, however, were stronger for Pandalus than for small-bodied shrimps. Further, abundances of Pandalus and small-bodied shrimps were negatively correlated and the latter had a stronger positive effect on rockfish, suggesting that rockfish mediated asymmetrical apparent competition between shrimps. Our results indicate mechanisms by which predatory fishes may influence the structure of marine communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations30
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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