Feeding and growth of the isopod<i>Idotea baltica</i>on the brown alga<i>Fucus vesiculosus</i>: Roles of inter-population and within-plant variation in plant quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
: We investigated the effects of local nutrient enrichment, among-population variation in quality, and within-plant variation in quality on growth, development, and food consumption (total amount of food ingested) of the marine isopod Idotea baltica when fed Fucus vesiculosus. We found that the proximity of fish farms increased carbon/nitrogen ratio, but did not change the concentration of phlorotannins in the F. vesiculosus thallus. Algal diets taken from sites close to or far from fish farms did not affect the growth, development, or total amount of food ingested of I. baltica. Therefore, eutrophication may not necessarily decrease the level of plant resistance. We found that different F. vesiculosus beds vary in quality and led to differences in total amount of food ingested and production efficiency of I. baltica. The variation in quality of F. vesiculosus in different locations may generate variance in grazing pressure between the belts. Idotea baltica was most sensitive to within-plant variation, as the isopods grew more and had higher production efficiency on apical than basal parts of F. vesiculosus. Idotea baltica did not compensate for the lower quality of basal parts by increasing consumption. This may indicate that the low quality of the basal thallus is related to higher levels of secondary metabolites and not to lower levels of soluble sugars or nitrogen that might have encouraged compensatory consumption. Our results suggest that within-plant variation in the quality of the F. vesiculosus is more important for herbivores than possible environmental variation caused by eutrophication.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".