An empirical test of ‘universal’ biomass scaling relationships in kelps: evidence of convergence with seed plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomass allocation patterns have received substantial consideration, leading to the recognition of several 'universal' interspecific trends. Despite efforts to understand biomass partitioning among embryophytes, few studies have examined macroalgae that evolved independently, yet function ecologically in much the same ways as plants. Kelps allocate photosynthate among three organs (the blade(s), stipe(s) and holdfast) that are superficially convergent with organs of land plants, providing a unique opportunity to test the limits of 'universal' trends. In this study, we used an allometric approach to quantify interspecific biomass partitioning patterns in kelps and assess whether embryophyte-based predictions of biomass scaling can be applied to marine macrophytes that lack root-to-leaf hydraulic transport. Photosynthetic area and dry mass were found to scale to approximately the ¾ power and kelp biomass allocation patterns were shown to match closely to empirical measures of allometric scaling among woody plants. Larger kelp species were found to have increased relative stipe and holdfast mass than smaller species, highlighting important consequences of size for marine macroalgae. Our study provides insights into the evolution of size in the largest marine macrophytes and corroborates previous work suggesting that the morphology of divergent lineages of photoautotrophs may reflect similar selective pressures.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".