Consistency in a marine algal‐grazer interaction over multiple scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coralline algae are conspicuous members of many marine assemblages, especially those characterized by intense grazing pressure. We explored whether articulated species, especially Corallina vancouveriensis, depend on grazing invertebrates to both establish and flourish in an exposed rocky intertidal setting, and whether this plant-grazer relationship varied over more than three orders of magnitude (≈100->300,000 μm). Three experimental manipulations, supplemented by observations on recruitment, demonstrated that (i) C. vancouveriensis failed to recover rapidly from disturbed areas when grazers were experimentally excluded; (ii) recruitment occurred in the presence of grazers; (iii) increasing surface texture of molded surfaces enhanced coralline recruitment more when grazers were present; and (iv) settlement occurred predominately in microtopographical low areas of a molded surface, whereas a competitively superior fleshy red alga tended to recruit to high areas. These results confirm that coralline algal establishment and persistence are enhanced by grazers and reveal that this relationship is consistent over a range of biologically relevant scales.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".