MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407908509 · doi:10.1002/ecy.70007

Kelp forests as nursery and foundational habitat for reef fishes

2025· review· en· W4407908509 on OpenAlexaff
Alejandro Pérez‐Matus, Fiorenza Micheli, Brenda Konar, Nick T. Shears, Natalie H. N. Low, Daniel K. Okamoto, Thomas Wernberg, Kira A. Krumhansl, SD Ling, Michael J. Kingsford, Teresa M. Navarrete-Fernández, Catalina S. Ruz, Jarrett E. K. Byrnes

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNational Center for Ecological Analysis and SynthesisAgencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloNational Science Foundation
KeywordsKelpKelp forestEcologyHabitatBiodiversityBiologyCoral reef fishReefMacrocystis pyriferaSpecies richnessAbundance (ecology)FisheryTrophic level

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conservation of marine biodiversity requires an understanding of the habitats needed to support and replenish species of interest. It also requires knowledge about the abundance and diversity of multispecies assemblages. Variation in the distribution and composition of kelp forests, one of the most productive marine coastal habitats globally, can have major influences on reef fishes-a group of ecologically and socioeconomically important species. In the face of widespread and escalating loss of kelp forests, quantification of these effects is urgently needed to assess and project cascading impacts on biodiversity. Here, we evaluate relationships between kelp forests and associated reef fish populations using a global meta-analysis of experimental kelp removals and comparative surveys of kelp and adjacent non-kelp habitats. These analyses show that kelp forests increase the abundance of reef fishes, though the significance of this effect varied depending on the structural complexity of kelp forests. In experimental studies, kelp forests have a significant positive effect on fish species richness, revealing that kelp act as true foundation species by supporting the diversity of associated multispecies assemblages. Importantly, regardless of kelp forest morphology and type of study (observational or experimental studies), kelp forests enhance the recruitment of early life history stages suggesting they are nursery habitats for many reef fish taxa. Lastly, kelp forests differentially affected species with different functional traits; small body size fishes from low trophic levels (e.g., herbivore and detritivores, micropredators, and mesopredators) and large body size fish from higher trophic level (e.g., piscivores, general carnivores) were both facilitated by kelp forests. Taken together, these results indicate that the loss of kelp forest, particularly those with more complex morphology, can reduce total abundance and diversity of fish, with possible cascading consequences for coastal ecosystem function.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207