Integrating nekton communities, salt pool dynamics, and fish foraging patterns to assess salt marsh restoration success in Maritime Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Salt marsh restoration aims to recover areas and ecological functions that have been impacted by human activities. We evaluated different structural and functional metrics to assess the response of nekton to salt marsh restoration in two distinct case studies in Maritime Canada in 2022–2023. We compared the visiting nekton communities in intertidal creeks and on marsh platforms, the abiotic conditions and small-bodied faunal communities in salt pools, and the foraging patterns of two fishes between reference and restoring marshes. In both case studies, similar nekton species were observed between reference and restoring marshes; however, nekton communities differed by site type (14-52% of the variation). Pools in restoring marshes were providing basic nekton functions but had yet to offer the enhanced habitat support as those in reference marshes. Gut fullness was similar in tomcods ( Microgadus tomcod ) and mummichogs ( Fundulus heteroclitus ) between site types suggesting that restoring marshes were fulfilling foraging function for these species despite site type differences (11-44% of the variation) in prey composition being detected. Although the nekton community structure and functions in restoring marshes did not mirror those in references marshes, our findings highlight the value of restoring salt marshes in terms of nekton habitat. This study also demonstrates the advantages of implementing a multifaceted approach to understand the response of biotic communities to salt marsh restoration.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".