MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388541051 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0293702

Shallow subtidal marine benthic communities of Nachvak Fjord, Nunatsiavut, Labrador: A glimpse into species composition and drivers of their distribution

2023· article· en· W4388541051 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alan M. Friedlander, Enric Ballesteros, Alyssa M. Adler, Whitney Goodell, Ryan Jenkinson, Jennie A. Knopp, Christopher D. H. Thompson, Molly A. Timmers, Cameron Walsh, Enric Sala

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsOceans Limited (Canada)
FundersNational Geographic Society
KeywordsFjordKelpCoralline algaeKelp forestBenthic zoneOceanographyMarine protected areaEcologySeagrassSeascapeHabitatInvertebrateScuba divingFisheryAlgaeBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marine fjords along the northern Labrador coast of Arctic Canada are influenced by freshwater, nutrients, and sediment inputs from ice fields and rivers. These ecosystems, further shaped by both Atlantic and Arctic water masses, are important habitats for fishes, marine mammals, seabirds, and marine invertebrates and are vital to the Labrador Inuit who have long depended on these areas for sustenance. Despite their ecological and socio-cultural importance, these marine ecosystems remain largely understudied. Here we conducted the first quantitative underwater scuba surveys, down to 12 m, of the nearshore marine ecology of Nachvak Fjord, which is surrounded by Torngat Mountains National Park located in Nunatsiavut, the Indigenous lands claim region of northeastern Canada. Our goal was to provide the Nunatsiavut Government with a baseline of the composition and environmental influences on the subtidal community in this isolated region as they work towards the creation of an Indigenous-led National Marine Conservation Area that includes Nachvak Fjord. We identified four major benthic habitat types: (1) boulders (2) rocks with sediment, (3) sediment with rocks, and (4) unconsolidated sediments, including sand, gravel, and cobble. Biogenic cover (e.g., kelp, coralline algae, and sediment) explained much of the variability in megabenthic invertebrate community structure. The kelp species Alaria esculenta, Saccharina latissima, and Laminaria solidungula dominated the boulder habitat outside of the fjord covering 35%, 13%, and 11% of the sea floor, respectively. In contrast, the middle and inner portions of the fjord were devoid of kelp and dominated by encrusting coralline algae. More diverse megabenthic invertebrate assemblages were detected within the fjord compared to the periphery. Fish assemblages were depauperate overall with the shorthorn sculpin, Myoxocephalus scorpius, and the Greenland cod, Gadus ogac, dominating total fish biomass contributing 64% and 30%, respectively. Understanding the composition and environmental influences within this fjord ecosystem not only contributes towards the protection of this ecological and culturally important region but serves as a baseline in a rapidly changing climatic region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMarine and coastal plant biology→French-language works237,207→