Vacuum Effect: A Redistribution Process of Organic Carbon Mediated by Bivalve Farming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bivalve farming affects the spatiotemporal distribution of organic carbon deposition to benthic environments, potentially altering ecosystem functioning. In this study, spatiotemporal patterns of benthic organic carbon flux of a bottom-based Manila clam ( Ruditapes philippinarum ) farm were estimated for a 1 year farming cycle using a carbon flux model coupled to a two-dimensional (2-D) hydrodynamic (MIKE-3) and a clam dynamic energy budget (DEB) model. The simulated flux was compared to the sediment total organic carbon (TOC) and contribution of biodeposits to sediment TOC based on stable isotope signatures. The outputs of the model illustrated a clear “vacuum effect” with increased carbon flux within and near the farming area (deposition area) and reduced flux outside the farm (depletion area), which could also correspond to changes in sediment TOC. Moreover, the contribution of biodeposits to the carbon flux was overall higher compared to that of biodeposits to sediment TOC, indicating a loss of biodeposits from deposition to storage in the sediment. This study highlights the role clam farming plays in the dynamics of organic carbon by linking vertical fluxes with sediment TOC, which addresses the current knowledge gaps related to the carbon footprint in coastal bivalve aquaculture systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".