Evaluation of dose-response effects of farmed mussel biodeposition on benthic communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No abstracts are to be cited without prior reference to the author.Much work has examined the influence of biodeposition from bivalves in suspended culture on benthic infaunal communities. However, most such studies have been comparative in nature, contrasting sites with culture to various control or reference sites; little effort has been directed at determining the dose-dependent effects of biodeposition on such communities. This study evaluated the dose-dependent response of benthic communities to varying levels of biodeposition using benthic mesocosms in the Magdalen Islands, eastern Canada. Mesocosms (60 cm diameter) were placed in situ (i.e. in the natural muddy sand seabed adjacent to an existing mussel farm) and received biodeposition from known densities of mussels which were placed in cages overlying the mesocosms. Densities chosen mimicked biodeposition from mussels at densities of 0, 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1200, and 1400 mussels m–2 as well as control areas (i.e. without mesocosms). Replicate 10-cm-diameter samples were collected from each mesocosm following 60 days incubation and the experiment halted. There were clear visual effects from biodeposition and, overall, benthic communities responded as predicted a priori to organic enrichment because of biodeposition. Results are discussed with respect to their importance to predictive ecological modelling for sustainable bivalve aquaculture. Shortcomings of the experiment and ongoing work to address this are also discussed
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".