MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214489318 · doi:10.1111/gcb.16142

Arctic marine forest distribution models showcase potentially severe habitat losses for cryophilic species under climate change

2022· article· en· W4214489318 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Trevor T. Bringloe, David P. Wilkinson, Jesica Goldsmit, Amanda M. Savoie, Karen Filbee‐Dexter, Kathleen A. MacGregor, Katie E. Howland, Christopher W. McKindsey, Heroen Verbruggen

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Change Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalArcticNetCanadian Museum of NatureFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersAustralian Research CouncilArcticNet
KeywordsArcticClimate changeRange (aeronautics)EcologyHabitatMarine ecosystemArctic vegetationEnvironmental scienceSpecies distributionTemperate climateArchipelagoTemperate rainforestArctic ecologyBiomass (ecology)EcosystemGeographyOceanographyTundraGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic is among the fastest-warming areas of the globe. Understanding the impact of climate change on foundational Arctic marine species is needed to provide insight on ecological resilience at high latitudes. Marine forests, the underwater seascapes formed by seaweeds, are predicted to expand their ranges further north in the Arctic in a warmer climate. Here, we investigated whether northern habitat gains will compensate for losses at the southern range edge by modelling marine forest distributions according to three distribution categories: cryophilic (species restricted to the Arctic environment), cryotolerant (species with broad environmental preferences inclusive but not limited to the Arctic environment), and cryophobic (species restricted to temperate conditions) marine forests. Using stacked MaxEnt models, we predicted the current extent of suitable habitat for contemporary and future marine forests under Representative Concentration Pathway Scenarios of increasing emissions (2.6, 4.5, 6.0, and 8.5). Our analyses indicate that cryophilic marine forests are already ubiquitous in the north, and thus cannot expand their range under climate change, resulting in an overall loss of habitat due to severe southern range contractions. The extent of marine forests within the Arctic basin, however, is predicted to remain largely stable under climate change with notable exceptions in some areas, particularly in the Canadian Archipelago. Succession may occur where cryophilic and cryotolerant species are extirpated at their southern range edge, resulting in ecosystem shifts towards temperate regimes at mid to high latitudes, though many aspects of these shifts, such as total biomass and depth range, remain to be field validated. Our results provide the first global synthesis of predicted changes to pan-Arctic coastal marine forest ecosystems under climate change and suggest ecosystem transitions are unavoidable now for some areas.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations44
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Change BiologySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207