Baseline Caribbean Reefs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Caribbean coral reefs started to deteriorate before systematic monitoring began and so questions remain about how reefs have changed since human impact and if they have transitioned into functionally ‘novel’ states. To explore these questions, we mapped and bulk-sampled several hectares of mid-Holocene reefs in Caribbean Panama and the Dominican Republic and compared the composition and ecological function of these pre-human impact reefs to nearby modern reefs. We quantified the remains of all major reef groups, but focus here on molluscs, corals, and fishes. Filter feeding molluscs are twice as abundant relative to other feeding modes on modern reefs, commensurate with eutrophication from land use changes. At the same time, large herbivorous gastropods declined significantly in size due to millennia of human selective harvesting. We observed the well-documented loss of Acroporid corals and a functional shift in coral communities towards weedier, slower growing, and brooding species. Some modern coral communities appear to retain some historical functions, and isolated Acropora refugia do persist, but the corals in them are less robust than those in the mid-Holocene, questioning their functional resilience to future change. Reef fish otolith assemblages suggest an 80% decline in non-harvested fish and a relative increase in planktotrophy—patterns best explained by the loss of coral structure and eutrophication. Counterintuitively, otolith sizes suggest that non-harvested fish are larger than they were in the past, a result that suggests lower mortality rates from reduced predation due to a loss of predators. This conclusion is supported by the estimated 71% decline in shark abundances and 400% increase in evidence of damselfish algal-gardening on modern reefs. These examples illustrate how both bottom-up and top-down processes have reshaped the structure, trophic interactions and ecosystem functions of Caribbean reefscapes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".