On biotic and abiotic drivers of the microphytobenthos seasonal cycle in a temperate intertidal mudflat: a modelling study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Microphytobenthos (MPB) from intertidal mudflats are key primary producers at the land–ocean interface. MPB can be more productive than phytoplankton and sustain both benthic and pelagic higher trophic levels. The objective of this study is to assess the contribution of light, mud temperature, and gastropod Peringia ulvae grazing pressure in shaping the seasonal MPB dynamics on the Brouage mudflat (NW France). We use a physical–biological coupled model applied to the sediment first centimetre for the year 2008. The simulated data compare to observations, including time-coincident remotely sensed and in situ data. The model suggests an MPB annual cycle characterised by a main spring bloom, a biomass depression in summer, and a moderate fall bloom. In early spring, simulated photosynthetic rates are high due to mud surface temperature (MST) values close to the MPB temperature optimum for photosynthesis and because increasing solar irradiance triggers the onset of the MPB spring bloom. Simulated peaks of high P. ulvae grazing (11 days during which ingestion rates exceed the primary production rate) mostly contribute to the decline of the MPB bloom along with the temperature limitation for MPB growth. In late spring–summer, the MPB biomass depression is due to the combined effect of thermo-inhibition and a moderate but sustained grazing pressure. The model ability to infer biotic and abiotic mechanisms driving the seasonal MPB dynamics could open the door to a new assessment of the export flux of biogenic matter from the coast to the open ocean and, more generally, of the contribution of productive intertidal biofilms to the coastal carbon cycle.
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".