Factors influencing juvenile sheltering in sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus Franciscanus and S. Droebachiensis)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juvenile red sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus franciscan us) are often found under the spines of adults, but those of the green urchin (S. droebachiensis) do not shelter to the same extent. As broadcast-spawners with free-swimming larvae, two questions arise: (1) why and; (2) how does sheltering occur? Juvenile S. franciscanus increased sheltering in response to increased predation risk and hydrodynamic factors, whereas juvenile S. droebachiensis did not. Sheltering afforded protection from a predatory starfish (i.e. Pycnopodia helianthoides) in S. franciscanus but not S. droebachiensis. Water velocities were reduced by 90% within 5 cm of adults where juveniles sheltered. Field surveys confirmed that juvenile abundance is positively correlated with increased water motion. However, results indicate that juveniles compete with adults for kelp, displaying lower growth rates when exposed to adults. Juvenile S. franciscanus displayed consistent movement towards a secondary chemical signal released by adults exposed to P. helianthoides, whereas adults did not respond in the same manner. These results highlight the importance of post-settlement processes and call for the inclusion of juvenile stages in predictions of recruitment and population dynamics.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".