Intertidal community structure, dynamics and models : mechanisms and the role of biotic and abiotic interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is a comprehensive and experimental approach to understand the dynamics producing structure in an intertidal algal community. Both biological factors (competition and herbivory) and physical factors (disturbance and physical stress) were investigated through field manipulative experiments, non-manipulative monitoring and laboratory experiments for the last 3 years in Barkley Sound, Vancouver Island. The community studied contains three dominant perennial macroalgae, Mazzaella cornucopiae (Rhodophyta), Fucus distichus and Pelvetiopsis limitata (Phaeophyta), and some ephemeral algae as well as coexisting invertebrates such as barnacles, limpets and snails. Biological interactions and their mechanisms for all these organisms turned out to be complicated and non-hierarchical interaction networks which include reversal of dominance and indirect interaction. There was evidence for both negative and positive interactions existing between the same pair of species. Competitive dominance was changed depending on the developmental stages of the competitors and due to differences in morphology, and also the outcomes of interactions were modified by physical stresses (i.e., desiccation and wave action). Snails preferentially grazed the red alga, and limpets reduced the abundance of the ephemeral algae (the early colonizers) which otherwise inhibited the settlement of the later successional species such as the fucoids. Barnacles facilitated the colonization of Fucus and ephemeral algae after disturbance. Responses of the three dominant algae and ephemerals to the different sizes and time of disturbance were species-specific and depended on the alga’s life history and reproductive characteristics. The study shows that both the biological and physical factors influenced the structure of this community, and that the non-hierarchical interactions among the major species and their well-balanced responses to disturbance support a high likelihood of maintaining the current diversity in this algal community.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".