Using successional drivers to understand spatiotemporal dynamics in intertidal mudflat communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Elucidating factors (“drivers”) that influence succession after disturbance can explain ecological phenomena, including why communities vary spatiotemporally. To gain insight on drivers related to habitat availability, species availability, and species performance during succession, we conducted two field experiments on infaunal communities in intertidal mudflats, one on each of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of Canada, that had disturbances of different type, size, and frequency. Related to habitat availability drivers, we observed that disturbance type and size, which differed between experiments, did not change end patterns of succession; however, disturbance frequency, directly assessed in one experiment, did. Dispersal of species from surrounding mudflat and water column (species availability) was the primary driver of succession, whereas local interactions between species after colonization (species performance drivers) did not have a detectable effect. We suggested that ample space and resources diffused competition and predation effects, and so species replacements did not occur in our systems, resulting in a lack of “traditional” successional dynamics as observed in other ecosystems. Our findings that community composition in intertidal mudflats is strongly influenced by species availability on two different coasts suggest that this driver may be key to variation in intertidal mudflat communities elsewhere.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.020 | 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 teacher head, 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".