Nearshore microfossil assemblages in a Caribbean reef environment show variable rates of recovery following Hurricane Irma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Modern microfossil distributions reflect site‐specific habitats and provide an opportunity to assess sediment transport pathways in the nearshore environment. When applied to overwash deposits in the geological record, they provide insight into sediment provenance and transport, factors important for understanding patterns of frequency and intensity of past storms and tsunamis. Modern distribution studies are rare and often the first established ones occur immediately after an overwash event as part of a post‐event field survey. This is problematic because it is unclear what effect overwash events have on nearshore microfossil assemblages and what time interval is necessary for them to return to pre‐event conditions. This study documents the impacts of Hurricane Irma on nearshore sediments off the coast of Anegada, British Virgin Islands, using distributions of Homotrema rubrum, an encrusting foraminifer with a defined provenance in coral reefs. At four sampling intervals spanning two years, from six months pre‐Hurricane Irma to eighteen months after, surface sediment was collected from three transects on the northern and southern shores of the island. Partitioning Around Medoids cluster analysis revealed that Hurricane Irma introduced an influx of well‐preserved fragments into the reef flat and made the sediments more uniform, limiting the foraminifer’s utility as a known sediment transport indicator. The mixing of sediments along the two northern transects (reef proximal) persisted for seven to eighteen months before returning to near pre‐hurricane conditions. However, the southern transect (absence of reef), where Homotrema rubrum concentrations are significantly less, failed to recover within the time period assessed by this study, indicating a variable recovery period between Atlantic Ocean and Caribbean Sea facing shorelines. Results from this study suggest that a waiting period of at least eighteen months after a major storm is recommended before collecting surface sediment from the nearshore environments of reef‐dominated coastlines.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".