Assessing Natural Substrates for Restricting Movement of California Sea Cucumbers <i>Parastichopus californicus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract California sea cucumbers Parastichopus californicus are reported to prefer hard over soft substrates and can be found associated with shell hash at bivalve farms. We predicted that soft substrates and oyster shells might restrict the movement of sea cucumbers and tested this hypothesis in a laboratory experiment. Small (contracted length, ~4.5 cm) and large (~10 cm) sea cucumbers were placed in the middle of tanks on a uniform, hard substrate (30 × 30-cm PVC sheet) surrounded by various substrates: no substrate (control); silt, fine sand, and very coarse sand (grain sizes: 2–50 μm, 100–250 μm, and 1–2 mm, respectively); and Pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas shells (~10-cm border around the PVC sheet) with or without silt surrounding the shells. Movement of individuals was monitored over 24 h in six replicate trials. The mean percent (±SE) of sea cucumbers remaining on the PVC sheet was not significantly different among the control (22 ± 7%), silt (28 ± 8%), fine sand (37 ± 8%), and very coarse sand (20 ± 7%) treatments. Low percentages (&lt;40%) indicated that the animals were not averse to emigrating to the soft substrates. However, significantly more sea cucumbers remained on the hard substrates (PVC and oyster shells) in the treatments comprised of oyster shell (83 ± 7%) and silt with oyster shell (82 ± 8%) than on the PVC sheet in the soft substrate treatments, indicating an affinity of the sea cucumbers for the oyster shells. Significantly more small individuals (95 ± 5%) than large ones (69 ± 9%) remained on the hard substrates. This study demonstrates that soft substrates do not prevent the movement of sea cucumbers under laboratory conditions, while oyster shells may cause a decrease in movement, which has implications for benthic ranching of commercially-farmed sea cucumbers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".