MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892239550 · doi:10.5061/dryad.wh70rxwz6

The influence of artificial light at night (ALAN) on algal phenol concentrations can mediate herbivore-alga interactions

2025· dataset· en· W6892239550 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicImpact of Light on Environment and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersAgencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo
KeywordsAlgaeArtificial lightSnailPigmentCarotenoid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial light at night (ALAN) is a human-induced factor affecting various biological complexity levels and species. Research on ALAN impact has focused on vertebrates and invertebrates, with less attention on primary producers like marine algae. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of ALAN on production of phenolic compounds in the red alga, Mazzaella laminarioides, and their indirect impact on the feeding behavior of the marine snail Tegula atra. Algae were exposed to the following treatments: natural day/night cycles, ALAN, and continuous darkness. We observed a higher phenolic concentration during high tide, in according with periods of feeding activity of herbivores. In comparison to algae exposed to natural day/night conditions, those exposed to ALAN showed the lowest concentrations of phenols. Tegula atra consumed significantly more algae than those exposed to ALAN, a result that is consistent with the preference trials, where algae exposed to ALAN was consumed more than algae maintained in natural conditions or continuous darkness. This evidence suggests that ALAN can impact on the production of phenolic compounds and, indirectly, on algal-herbivore interactions.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.007

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicImpact of Light on Environment and HealthFrench-language works237,207