MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155806847 · doi:10.1515/bot-2020-0072

Abundance of a recently discovered Alaskan rhodolith bed in a shallow, seagrass-dominated lagoon

2021· article· en· W3155806847 on OpenAlexaff
David H. Ward, Courtney L. Amundson, Patrick J. Fitzmorris, Damian M. Menning, Joel A. Markis, Kristine M. Sowl, Sandra C. Lindstrom

Bibliographic record

VenueBotanica Marina · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZostera marinaBenthic zoneSeagrassOceanographyBiomass (ecology)Abundance (ecology)Environmental scienceEcosystemEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rhodoliths are important foundation species of the benthic photic zone but are poorly known and rarely studied in Alaska. A bed of Lithothamnion soriferum rhodoliths was discovered in 2008 in Kinzarof Lagoon, Alaska, a shallow-water embayment dominated by eelgrass (Zostera marina). Rhodolith spatial extent and biomass were estimated to assess trends and environmental factors that may influence rhodolith distribution and abundance during four years spread over a 12-year period (2008–2010, and 2019). Presence and biomass of rhodoliths were negatively associated with percent eelgrass cover. Biomass of rhodoliths also decreased with increased water temperature. Rhodoliths occurred in two primary areas of the lagoon, a 182 ha core area in a shallow water (mean tide depth of −0.03 m MLLW) tidal channel with low eelgrass density, and a 22 ha outlying area at shallower water depths (>0.2 m MLLW) with moderate to high eelgrass cover. There was no apparent trend in rhodolith biomass over the study period despite wide variation in mean annual estimates. This study establishes a baseline for continued investigations and monitoring of this important benthic resource in Alaska.

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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanica MarinaSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207