Marine latitudinal diversity gradients are generally absent in intertidal ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current latitudinal diversity gradient (LDG) meta-analyses have failed to distinguish one of the most widespread marine habitats, the intertidal zone, as a separate system despite it having unique abiotic challenges and spatially compressed stress gradients that affect the distribution and abundance of resident species. We address this issue by revisiting published literature and datasets on LDGs since 1911 to explore LDG patterns and their strengths in intertidal benthic, subtidal benthic, and pelagic realms and discuss the importance of recognizing intertidal ecosystems as distinct. Rocky shorelines were the most studied intertidal ecosystem encompassing 64.2% of intertidal LDG studies, and 62.9% of studies focused on assemblage composition, while the remaining 37.1% of studies were taxa specific. While our analyses confirmed LDGs in subtidal benthic and pelagic realms, with a decrease in richness toward the poles, we found no consistent intertidal LDGs in any ocean or coastline across hemispheres or biodiversity unit. Analyzing intertidal and subtidal zones as separate systems increased the strength of subtidal benthic LDGs relative to analyses combining these systems. We demonstrate that in intertidal ecosystems across oceans in both hemispheres, a latitudinal decrease in species richness is not readily apparent, which stands in contrast with significant LDG patterns found in the subtidal realm. Intertidal habitat heterogeneity, regional environmental variability and biological interactions can create species-rich hot spots independent of latitude, which may functionally outweigh a typical latitudinal decline in species richness. Although previous work has shown weaker LDGs in benthic than pelagic systems, we demonstrate that this is caused by combining subtidal and intertidal benthic ecosystems into a single benthic category. Thus, we propose that subtidal and intertidal ecosystems cannot be combined into one entity as the physical and biological parameters controlling ecosystem processes are vastly different, even among intertidal ecosystems. Thus, the intertidal zone offers a unique model system in which hypotheses can be further tested to better understand the complex processes underlying LDGs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".