MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952564408 · doi:10.1101/672121

NON-RANDOM TIMING OF ECOLOGICAL SHIFTS ON CARIBBEAN CORAL REEFS SUGGESTS REGIONAL CAUSES OF CHANGE

2019· preprint· en· W2952564408 on OpenAlexaff
William F. Precht, Richard B. Aronson, Toby Gardner, Jennifer A. Gill, Julie P. Hawkins, Edwin A. Hernández‐Delgado, Walter C. Jaap, Tim R. McClanahan, Melanie McField, Thaddeus J. T. Murdoch, Maggy M. Nugues, Callum M. Roberts, Christiane K. Schelten, Andrew R. Watkinson, Isabelle M. Côté

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilFlorida Institute of TechnologyNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Geographic SocietyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCoralReefCoral reefAquaculture of coralDominance (genetics)Environmental issues with coral reefsResilience of coral reefsBenthic zoneEcologyCoral reef protectionFringing reefFisheryOceanographyGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A bstract Caribbean reefs have experienced unprecedented changes in the past four decades. Of great concern is the perceived widespread shift from coral to macroalgal dominance and the question of whether it represents a new, stable equilibrium for coral-reef communities. The primary causes of the shift -- grazing pressure (top-down), nutrient loading (bottom-up) or direct coral mortality (side-in) -- still remain somewhat controversial in the coral reef literature. We have attempted to tease out the relative importance of each of these causes. Four insights emerge from our analysis of an early regional dataset of information on the benthic composition of Caribbean reefs spanning the years 1977–2001. First, although three-quarters of reef sites have experienced coral declines concomitant with macroalgal increases, fewer than 10% of the more than 200 sites studied were dominated by macroalgae in 2001, by even the most conservative definition of dominance. Using relative dominance as the threshold, a total of 49 coral-to-macroalgae shifts were detected. This total represents ∼35% of all sites that were dominated by coral at the start of their monitoring periods. Four shifts (8.2%) occurred because of coral loss with no change in macroalgal cover, 15 (30.6%) occurred because of macroalgal gain without coral loss, and 30 (61.2%) occurred owing to concomitant coral decline and macroalgal increase. Second, the timing of shifts at the regional scale is most consistent with the side-in model of reef degradation, which invokes coral mortality as a precursor to macroalgal takeover, because more shifts occurred after regional coral-mortality events than expected by chance. Third, instantaneous observations taken at the start and end of the time-series for individual sites showed these reefs existed along a continuum of coral and macroalgal cover. The continuous, broadly negative relationship between coral and macroalgal cover suggests that in some cases coral-to-macroalgae phase shifts may be reversed by removing sources of perturbation or restoring critical components such as the herbivorous sea urchin Diadema antillarum to the system. The five instances in which macroalgal dominance was reversed corroborate the conclusion that macroalgal dominance is not a stable, alternative community state as has been commonly assumed. Fourth, the fact that the loss in regional coral cover and concomitant changes to the benthic community are related to punctuated, discrete events with known causes (i.e. coral disease and bleaching), lends credence to the hypothesis that coral reefs of the Caribbean have been under assault from climate-change-related maladies since the 1970s.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems StudiesFrench-language works237,207