MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047244145 · doi:10.1007/s12237-020-00803-3

Response and Recovery of Eelgrass (Zostera marina) to Chronic and Episodic Light Disturbance

2020· article· en· W3047244145 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEstuaries and Coasts · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans Canada
KeywordsShade toleranceSeagrassZostera marinaBiomass (ecology)ShootRhizomeDisturbance (geology)ShadingBiologyShade avoidanceEnvironmental scienceBotanyEcologyCanopyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reduced light availability is a leading cause of seagrass declines worldwide. Light deficiency can be chronic or episodic, where pulsed light stress is punctuated by periods of optimal light. Seagrass resilience to light stress is likely modulated by the durations of light stress and the level of light reduction, yet remains poorly understood. We used a laboratory experiment to examine the response and recovery of Zostera marina to 16 weeks of three types of light disturbance: (i) continuous (C; constant shade), (ii) episodic low (EL; cycles of 4 days shade:3 days no shade), and (iii) episodic high (EH; cycles of 12 days shade:2 days no shade), each implemented at three shade levels (40, 60, and 80% shade). Declines in shoot density and biomass began after 8 weeks and were highest in C and EH disturbance in 60 and 80% shade. Declines were minimal in 40% shade across all light disturbances and in EL across all shade levels. Sheath length responded mainly to shade level, initially increasing in 60 and 80% shade before decreasing. Rhizome carbohydrates initially declined in all light disturbances with 80% shade but did so earlier in C and EH disturbance, and then increased once shoot density decreased. When ambient light was restored, physiological measures recovered, but shoot density, biomass, and morphology did not. Our study showed that shade level strongly modulated Z. marina responses to light disturbance. Not only will chronic high light reduction have negative impacts but pulsed light disturbance can as well, especially when light-stress periods are long and light reduction high.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · 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