Bibliographic record
Abstract
The clonal seaweed Chondrus crispus (Rhodophyta, Gigartinales) forms extensive stands at low intertidal elevations on wave-sheltered rocky shores of the North Atlantic.This study investigates if this bushy alga acts as a foundation species in such habitats.The abundance (percent cover) of C. crispus, all other algae, and invertebrates was measured in 390 quadrats spanning 350 km of coast in Nova Scotia, Canada.In these low-intertidal habitats, fucoid algae are the largest organisms and can form extensive canopies, but their cover was unrelated to benthic species richness and to C. crispus cover.Species richness, however, increased with C. crispus cover from low to intermediate cover values, showing little change towards full C. crispus cover.Species composition (a combined measure of species identity and their relative abundance) differed between quadrats with low (0-1%) and high (60-100%) cover of C. crispus.High C. crispus cover was associated to more invertebrate species but fewer algal species than low C. crispus cover.However, the average abundance of algal and invertebrate species occurring in both cover groups was often higher under high C. crispus cover, contributing to a higher average richness at the quadrat scale.Overall, only 16% of the observed variation in species richness was explained by C. crispus cover.Therefore, this study suggests that C. crispus acts as a foundation species but with a moderate influence.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".