MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291884712 · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.900033

Growth as a function of sea ice cover, light and temperature in the arctic/subarctic coralline C. compactum: A year-long in situ experiment in the high arctic

2022· article· en· W4291884712 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jessica Gould, Jochen Halfar, Walter H. Adey, Justin B. Ries

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Marine Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMIT Sea Grant, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSea iceOceanographyArcticCrustoseArctic ice packSubarctic climateContext (archaeology)Environmental scienceCoralline algaeArctic sea ice declineGeologyAntarctic sea iceCoralPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term, high-resolution measurements of environmental variability are sparse in the High Arctic. In the absence of such data, we turn to proxies recorded in the layered skeletons of the long-lived crustose coralline algae Clathromorphum compactum. Annual growth banding in this alga is dependent on several factors that include temperature, light availability, nutrients, salinity, and calcium carbonate saturation state. It has been observed that growth slows during winter as sunlight reaching the seafloor diminishes due to decreased insolation and the build-up of sea-ice, such that the relationship between sea-ice cover extent and algal growth has allowed for reconstructions of relative sea-ice variability through time. However, recent laboratory work has shown that C. compactum continue growing in complete darkness (sea-ice cover). Therefore, a more complete understanding of algal growth is necessary for the refinement of the sea-ice proxy. Here, we present the results of a ~year-long in-situ growth and environmental monitoring experiment in Arctic Bay, Nunavut, Canada (~73°N) which addresses, for the first time in situ , the gaps in our understanding of growth over an annual cycle in the High Arctic. Algal growth was assessed on a quasi-monthly basis, where specimens were subsampled to quantify monthly extension in the context of ocean temperature and light availability. By measuring extension rate through time, we observed that the algae grew on average 72 µm yr -1 , with ~54% of annual growth occurring during the sea-ice free summer months (June-September), ~25% during the winter months (November-April), and ~21% occurring during the transition months of May and October. Although winter growth slowed, we did not observe a consistent cessation of linear extension during low-or no-light months. We posit that substantial growth during the winter months at this latitude is most likely a consequence of the mobilization of stored energy (photosynthate) produced during the photosynthetically active summer months. However, we also discuss the possibility of low light-photosynthetic activity and/or dark carbon fixation, which could also facilitate extension through time. Overall, the novel growth model presented here has implications for the use of C. compactum growth for reconstructing the environment as well as for trace-element-based (typically Mg/Ca) algal chronologies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207