MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362506875 · doi:10.1111/jpy.13329

Successional dynamics of the cultivated kelp microbiome

2023· article· en· W4362506875 on OpenAlexafffund
Katherine M. Davis, Logan Zeinert, Allison Q. Byrne, Jonathan D. Davis, Cosmo Roemer, Michael Wright, Laura Wegener Parfrey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Phycology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsMowi (Canada)Vancouver Island UniversityNorth Island CollegeBC Centre for Aquatic Health SciencesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersHakai Institute
KeywordsKelpBiologyMicrobiomeAbiotic componentEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kelp are important primary producers that are colonized by diverse microbes that can have both positive and negative effects on their hosts. The kelp microbiome could support the burgeoning kelp cultivation sector by improving host growth, stress tolerance, and resistance to disease. Fundamental questions about the cultivated kelp microbiome still need to be addressed before microbiome-based approaches can be developed. A critical knowledge gap is how cultivated kelp microbiomes change as hosts grow, particularly following outplanting to sites that vary in abiotic conditions and microbial source pools. In this study we assessed if microbes that colonize kelp in the nursery stage persist after outplanting. We characterized microbiome succession over time on two species of kelp, Alaria marginata and Saccharina latissima, outplanted to open ocean cultivation sites in multiple geographic locations. We tested for host-species specificity of the microbiome and the effect of different abiotic conditions and microbial source pools on kelp microbiome stability during the cultivation process. We found the microbiome of kelp in the nursery is distinct from that of outplanted kelp. Few bacteria persisted on kelp following outplanting. Instead, we identified significant microbiome differences correlated with host species and microbial source pools at each cultivation site. Microbiome variation related to sampling month also indicates that seasonality in host and/or abiotic factors may influence temporal succession and microbiome turnover in cultivated kelps. This study provides a baseline understanding of microbiome dynamics during kelp cultivation and highlights research needs for applying microbiome manipulation to kelp cultivation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

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

Citations26
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PhycologySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207