Barnacle recruit density and size increase from high to middle intertidal elevations in wave-exposed habitats on the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Barnacle recruitment is often studied in rocky intertidal habitats due to the relevant role that barnacles can play in intertidal communities. In 2014, barnacle (Semibalanus balanoides) recruitment was measured at high elevations in wave-exposed intertidal habitats on the NW Atlantic coast in Nova Scotia, Canada. Values were considerably lower than previously reported for middle elevations in wave-exposed intertidal habitats on the NE Atlantic and NE Pacific coasts. To determine if such differences in recruitment may have resulted from elevation influences, I did a field experiment in 2019 in wave-exposed intertidal habitats in Nova Scotia to test the hypothesis that recruitment is higher at middle than at high elevations, based on known environmental differences between both elevation zones. Based on data from three locations spanning 158 km of the Nova Scotia coast, barnacle recruitment was, on average, nearly 200 % higher (and recruits were larger) at middle than at high elevations. However, even with this increase, barnacle recruitment on this NW Atlantic coast is still lower than for comparable habitats on the NE Atlantic and NE Pacific coasts, and also lower than previously reported for wave-exposed locations farther south on the NW Atlantic coast, in Maine, USA. Therefore, barnacle recruitment in wave-exposed intertidal environments in Nova Scotia appears to be only moderate relative to other shores. This difference in the supply of barnacle recruits might influence the intensity of interspecific interactions involving barnacles.
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 | 0.001 | 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".