MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981522517 · doi:10.4095/305897

Cold-water coral distributions and surficial geology at five spatial scales on the Flemish Cap, northwest Atlantic

2017· report· en· W2981522517 on OpenAlexaff
Lara Lynne Miles, Evan Edinger, David J. W. Piper

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlemishCoralGeologyOceanographyPhysical geographyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold-water coral (CWC) distributions are strongly influenced by substrate, as they are sessile, long-lived benthic species. While the attachment substrate preferences (hard vs. soft) of many coral species are well known, the relationships between coral species distributions and geological environments are less clear. This study investigates the relationship between CWC distribution and geological environments in a deep offshore setting, examining both surficial geology and bedrock lithology. In 2010 we used a remotely operated vehicle to conduct four video surveys on the southern and eastern flanks of the Flemish Cap, NW Atlantic, ranging in depths from 870 m to 2900 m. CWC were identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level and assigned to functional groups: large gorgonians, small gorgonians, soft corals, pennatulaceans, antipatharians, Desmophyllum dianthus, and reclining solitary scleractinians. Surficial geology was classified at five spatial scales (10 m, 50 m, 100 m, 500 m, 1000 m) along each transect into one of six surficial geological and/or lithological geological facies (fine grained sediment, gravelly fine grained sediment, fine grained sediment and bedrock, igneous bedrock, and sedimentary bedrock). A total of thirty CWC species were observed, with each transect displaying a unique species composition and surficial geology. Functional groups were represented on most facies and depths. Anthomastus sp. (soft coral) was the most abundant coral species observed, and was found on most facies and depths. Soft corals and large gorgonians were the most abundant on the gravelly fine grain and sedimentary bedrock facies between 1673-1873 m. Analysis of Similarity (ANOSIM) showed an influence of both facies and depth on coral species composition, with depth apparently more important. Geological facies had a significant difference on coral species composition when measured at finer scales (10 m, 50 m, 100 m, and 500 m) but not at broader scales (1000m). Of the fine scales, 100 m was the most significant for both CWC species and functional groups. Our results suggest that bathymetry and oceanography are dominant influences on coral distribution at broad scales, with surficial geology dominating distributions at scales finer than 1 km.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies→French-language works237,207→