A new perspective on changing Arctic marine ecosystems: panarchy adaptive cycles in pan-Arctic spatial and temporal scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
5.1 Introduction For the first time in recent history, a new ocean is opening (Kinnard et al ., 2011). The retreat and thinning of the summer sea ice in the Arctic Ocean are perhaps the most visible indicators of the major physical changes underway in the Arctic Ocean (Kwok et al ., 2009; Walsh, 2013). While rates and even causes of ice loss remain under debate (Carmack and Melling, 2011), further loss of sea ice appears inevitable, and it is likely that within only a few decades the Arctic will see a mostly ice-free summer. The biological implications of this change depend, to a large extent, upon the interplay between altered abiotic conditions (e.g. temperature, salinity, stratification, nutrient availability, wind, underwater light, climate, etc.) and the response of organisms on all trophic levels changing, for example, patterns in primary production, respiration, and diversity (e.g. timing, magnitude, and quality of algal blooms, microbial processes, etc.). Changes in these physical/ biological interactions will occur across a variety of spatial and temporal scales and may be mitigated or strengthened based on widely varying rates of evolutionary adaptation. Studies, monitoring activities, and adaptive experiments that are focused on the often non-linear biophysical changes that are occurring and the linkages among them will likely offer new insights into the mechanisms, trajectories, and dynamics of ecological and evolutionary change in the Arctic and elsewhere (e.g. Overpeck et al ., 2005; Carmack et al ., 2012; McLaughlin et al ., 2011; Sunday et al ., 2011; Wassmann et al ., 2011; Duarte et al ., 2012). Here we briefly discuss some of the basic knowns about the interactions of physical change and the corresponding biological response in the Arctic Ocean, identify significant unknowns, and propose a new structural framework to guide further Arctic marine research in policy-relevant directions. A novel way to view the interaction among various physical and biological changes and their social relevance is through the systems theory perspective of ‘panarchy’ proposed by Gunderson and Holling (2001).
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".