Decreased calcification to photosynthesis ratio in coccolithophores under reduced O<sub>2</sub> and elevated CO<sub>2</sub> environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the physiological performance in the most cosmopolitan coccolithophorid, Emiliania huxleyi and Gephyrocapsa oceanica, which were treated with 8.3 (ambient O2 (AO)), 4.6 (medium O2 (MO)), and 2.5 (low O2 (LO)) mg L–1 O2 under 400 ppm (ambient CO2 (AC)) and 1000 (high CO2 (HC)) ppm CO2 conditions. Elevated CO2 decreased the specific growth rate of cells cultured under AO and LO conditions in both species, but it increased the rate in the MO-grown E. huxleyi. Regardless of the CO2 levels, diminished O2 concentration inhibited the growth rate in E. huxleyi while accelerating the rate in G. oceanica. LO reduced the particulate organic carbon (POC) production rate compared to the AO treatment in both species. Additionally, the decrease was higher in the HC cultures than in the AC ones. LO also inhibited the production rate of particulate inorganic carbon (PIC) compared to the AO/AC treatment. Due to a higher reduction in the production rate of PIC than POC, the PIC/POC ratio was decreased in the LO treatment compared to the AO/AC treatment. The current study reveals that low O2 can, individually or in combination with high CO2, considerably affect the physiology of marine photoautotrophic organisms.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".