Morphology of Ascophyllum nodosum in relation to commercial harvesting in New Brunswick, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Intertidal seaweed beds form three-dimensional structures providing habitat for a variety of species. As such, ecosystem-based management of seaweed harvesting must take into consideration the impact of the harvest not only on the biomass but also on the morphology of the seaweed. We compare the morphology and vertical distribution of biomass and shoots in Ascophyllum nodosum from three sites with a 20 + year history of commercial harvesting with three corresponding control sites in southern New Brunswick, Canada. We found no significant impact of harvest history on the vertical distribution of shoots or biomass within individual clumps. At two of the three harvested sites, large clumps had a wider circumference than those at the control sites, suggesting that long-term harvesting increases the growth of shoots throughout the clumps; presumably caused by an increase in light penetration through the harvested canopy. We also compare biomass of littorinids, the most abundant invertebrates found in A. nodosum beds at low tide and found no significant difference between control and harvested sites. We conclude that the harvest of A. nodosum according to the current regulations in New Brunswick, does not have long-term impact on the morphology of the algae or on the abundance of its main inhabitant.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".