Structuring forces of intertidal infaunal communities on the northern coast of British Columbia, Canada: assessing the relative importance of top-down, bottom-up, middle-out, and abiotic variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While trophic and habitat-related abiotic variables (predation, competition, tolerance, etc.) are known to influence community structure in many ecosystems, some systems appear to be only minimally influenced by these variables. Sampling multiple tidal flat communities in northern BC, Canada, we investigated the relative importance of top-down and middle-out (mesopredators) variables, competition for resources (bottom up), and abiotic variables in structuring an infaunal community (invertebrates living in sediment). Similar to previous studies on mudflats in the Bay of Fundy (also at a north temperate latitude), we determined that these variables accounted for a minor (0%–9%) proportion of the observed variation in this infaunal community, suggesting that these variables play a small role in structuring this community. Based on the results of our study and in combination with previous experiments on infaunal recovery patterns post disturbance, we posit that the main factors influencing these infaunal communities likely operate at a scale of sites (kilometres) and(or) plot (metres or less) but not transects (10–100 m within site). Candidate forces structuring these intertidal communities that need future examination include regional species pools and the variables that affect these pools, sediment biogeochemistry, and disturbance/recovery history of a site. The similarity of our Pacific coast findings to those from the north temperate Atlantic coast suggests some similarity in the processes structuring these distinct infaunal communities.
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) | 0.000 | 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".