A New Method of Determining Glass Sponge Reef Adaptive Management Zones for the Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound Marine Protected Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The world’s largest living glass sponge reefs, located in the Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound off British Columbia, are impacted by bottom contact fishing gear. The existing Adaptive Management Zones (AMZs) for the protection of these reefs were determined by considering the potential exposure of glass sponges to suspended sediment due to mobile bottom-contact fishing, but without considering their pumping arrest threshold concentrations. Here, we develop a new method that uses a sediment transport model under horizontally variable near-bottom currents and newly available sponge reef pumping arrest thresholds to determine the size and shape of AMZ for the northern reefs in the Hecate Strait and Queen Charlotte Sound Marine Protected Area. The resulting AMZ is larger than the existing AMZ due to the observation that the largest currents are not always in the direction of the dominant tidal flows, the introduction of the new pumping arrest threshold, and the inclusion of a background sediment concentration. The new AMZ boundary could provide more adequate protection for the glass sponge reefs from the effects of sedimentation induced by mobile, bottom-contact fishing activity. The new method is applicable to other glass sponge reefs in British Columbia waters.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".