Physical, biological and human-induced effects on the reef fishes of Fernando de Noronha archipelago, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vários fatores têm o potencial de influenciar a distribuição e a composição das comunidades de peixes recifais. Entre os mais importantes estão a rugosidade, a exposição às ondas, a cobertura do substrato e as atividades humanas. O presente estudo avaliou a influência desses fatores nos peixes recifais de áreas com um gradiente de restrição a atividades humanas no arquipélago Fernando de Noronha, nordeste do Brasil e determinou suas importâncias relativas para a ecologia de peixes recifais. A rugosidade não influenciou a riqueza de peixes, mas influenciou o número de indivíduos, de jovens e de espécies residentes, enquanto a cobertura bêntica não pareceu ser um determinante importante para quaisquer das variáveis de peixes avaliadas. Esses resultados sugerem que a disponibilidade de abrigo (proteção física) é mais limitante que a disponibilidade de alimento (i.e. cobertura bêntica). Além disso, hidrodinamismo apresentou valores relativamente baixos, porém, influenciando negativamente os peixes. As atividades recreativas, apesar de aparentemente não-impactantes, tiveram um efeito negativo na abundância de peixes, com a área parcialmente protegida (Atalaia) mostrando uma estrutura semelhante à área não-protegida (Porto). Esses resultados sugerem que a presença humana, mesmo em áreas fiscalizadas, pode interferir na estrutura dos peixes recifais. É necessário uma proposta de gestão e de práticas de turismo de baixo impacto especialmente nas áreas parcialmente protegidas e não-protegidas. Palavras chave: Oceano Atlântico, cobertura bêntica, peixes recifais, hidrodinamismo, turismo. Abstract: Several factors have the potential to influence the distribution and composition of reef fish communities. Amongst the most important are rugosity, wave exposure, substrate cover and human activities. The present study evaluated the influence of these factors on reef fishes from sites following a gradient of human-induced effects on the Fernando de Noronha archipelago, northeast Brazil and determined their relative importance to reef fish ecology. Rugosity did not influence fish richness, but had a positive influence on number of individuals, juveniles and endemic species, whereas benthic cover did not seem to be an important determinant for any fish variable evaluated. These results suggest that availability of shelter (physical protection) is more limiting than availability of food (i.e. benthic cover). Furthermore, water flow showed somewhat low values, but even so, had negative effects on fish numbers. Recreational activities, albeit seemingly non-impacting, had a negative effect on fish abundance with the partially protected site (Atalaia) showing a similar community structure to the unrestricted site (Porto). These results suggest that human presence, even when supervised, may interfere on reef fish structure. Low-impact tourism practices are required especially in partially protected and unprotected areas. Key words: Atlantic Ocean, benthic cover, reef fishes, hydrodynamics, tourism.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".