Topographic controls on the distribution of bioturbation in an intertidal sandflat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Intertidal environments are highly dynamic and exhibit both regular and periodic fluctuations in environmental parameters. The interplay of these parameters controls the distribution and abundance of infaunal organisms resulting in sporadic bioturbation distributions that are well‐documented but not fully understood. This study investigates topographic controls on infaunal distributions at East Beach in White Rock, British Columbia, Canada. East Beach is a sandy intertidal flat characterized by sand dunes that give rise to two alternating shore‐parallel subenvironments: topographically high dune crests and topographically low interdunes. The dunes remain relatively fixed in their position between major storm events, resulting in geographically stable subenvironments. Photogrammetric reconstructions of dune surfaces are used to characterize surface features and quantify invertebrate burrow openings along dune profiles. This is supplemented by X‐ray radiography and examinations of porewater and organic matter content from the two subenvironments. These results show a clear inverse relationship between burrow abundance and elevation at the dune scale, with the interdunes displaying significantly higher bioturbation intensities compared to dune crests. The burrow distributions appear to be strongly influenced by water saturation, presumably due to its role in controlling oxygen availability and preventing desiccation. This research provides insights into the local factors controlling infaunal distributions and the impact of palaeo‐topography on bioturbation, particularly in intertidal settings. Additionally, these data assist in interpreting heterogeneous bioturbation distributions in the sedimentary record, which are normally not interpreted due to a paucity of analogue models developed in modern environments.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".