Latitudinal, seasonal and depth-dependent variation in growth, chemical composition and biofouling of cultivated Saccharina latissima (Phaeophyceae) along the Norwegian coast
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Norwegian coastline covers more than 10° in latitude and provides a range in abiotic and biotic conditions for seaweed farming. In this study, we compared the effects of cultivation depth and season on the increase in biomass (frond length and biomass yield), chemical composition (protein, tissue nitrogen, intracellular nitrate and ash content) and biofouling (total cover and species composition) of cultivatedSaccharina latissimaat nine locations along a latitudinal gradient from 58 to 69° N. The effects of light and temperature on frond length and biofouling were evaluated along with their relevance for selecting optimal cultivation sites. Growth was greater at 1–2 m than at 8–9 m depth and showed large differences among locations, mainly in relation to local salinity levels. Maximum frond lengths varied between 15 and 100 cm, and maximum biomass yields between 0.2 and 14 kg m−2. Timing of maximum frond length and biomass yield varied with latitude, peaking 5 and 8 weeks later in the northern location (69° N) than in the central (63° N) and southern (58° N) locations, respectively. The nitrogen-to-protein conversion factor (averaged across all locations and depths) was 3.8, while protein content varied from 22 to 109 mg g−1DW, with seasonality and latitude having the largest effect. The onset of biofouling also followed a latitudinal pattern, with a delayed onset in northern locations and at freshwater-influenced sites. The dominant epibiont was the bryozoanMembranipora membranacea. Our results demonstrate the feasibility ofS. latissimacultivation along a wide latitudinal gradient in North Atlantic waters and underscore the importance of careful site selection for seaweed aquaculture.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".