Replication data for: Rocky intertidal monitoring: a protocol for assessing human impact in Barkley Sound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1997 the Bamfield Marine Sciences Centre established a long-term monitoring project to collect baseline data on the distribution and abundance of macroorganisms at two intertidal sites on Wizard Islet in Barkley Sound. The sites were resampled in 2001, and data is presented here for algal and invertebrate cover (%) and invertebrate density. Wizard Islet (48°51’29.5”N, 125°09’31”W) is located within the Deer Group Islands in Barkley Sound and has an area of 1.73 hectares at low tide. The sheltered site (with less wave exposure) is located on a 50m stretch of fixed rocky shore on the northeast side and is characterized by Fucus and Phyllospadix (seagrass). The exposed site is located on a 50m stretch of fixed rocky shore on the southwest side and is characterized by Egregia (feather-boa kelp), goose-necked barnacles and Alaria (brown alga). Fifteen vertical transects at each site were sampled by randomly selecting 15 of the 50 numbered tags (actual tag numbers unknown). Sampling was done at tidal heights of 0.2 (exposed site only), 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3 and 3.5m. Quadrats of 25x25cm were used to determine species percent cover and abundance for floral and faunal macroorganisms. Quadrats of 50x50cm were used for larger organisms such as Astroidea and Pisaster. To maintain consistency, all quadrats were positioned to the left and above each point on the transect (when facing away from the water). Spreadsheets contain columns labelled EH1Q1 to EH8Q15 and SH2Q1 to SH8Q15. It is assumed that E and S refer to Exposed and Sheltered, H1-8 refers to tidal height and Q1-15 refers to transect. Sheltered columns start at SH2 because 0.2m was not sampled. Data was collected by students in the Coastal Biodiversity and Conservation course taught by Dr. Tom Berman with Teaching Assistant Dana Haggarty and support from Russ Markel July 23-Aug 31, 2001.
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 | 0.028 | 0.062 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.151 | 0.054 |
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".