Persistence of giants: population dynamics of the limpet Scutellastra laticostata on rocky shores in Western Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population dynamics and life history traits of the ‘giant’ limpetScutellastra laticostataon intertidal limestone platforms at Rottnest Island, Western Australia, were recorded by interannual (January/February) monitoring of limpet density and size structure, and relocation of marked individuals, at 3 locations over periods of 13-16 yr between 1993 and 2020. Limpet densities ranged from 4 to 9 ind. m-2on wave-swept seaward margins of platforms at 2 locations and on a rocky notch at the landward margin of the platform at a third. Juvenile recruits (25-55 mm shell length) were present each year, usually at low densities (<1 m-2), but localized pulses of recruitment occurred in some years. Annual survival rates of marked limpets varied among sites and cohorts, ranging from 0.42 yr-1at the notch to 0.79 and 0.87 yr-1on the platforms. A mass mortality of limpets on the platforms occurred in 2003, likely mediated by thermal stress during daytime low tides, coincident with high air temperatures and calm seas. Juveniles grew rapidly to adult size within 2 yr. Asymptotic size (L∞, von Bertalanffy growth model) ranged from 89 to 97 mm, and maximum size from 100 to 113 mm, on platforms. Growth rate and maximum size were lower on the notch. Our empirical observations and simulation models suggest that these populations are relatively stable on a decadal time scale. The frequency and magnitude of recruitment pulses and high rate of adult survival provide considerable inertia, enabling persistence of these populations in the face of sporadic climatic extremes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".