Ecosystem level effects of marine bivalve aquaculture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reviews the present state of knowledge on environmental issues related to bivalve aquaculture, with emphasis on suspended mussel culture. Material reviewed includes Canadian and international studies on the role of wild and cultured bivalve populations in controlling ecosystem-level dynamics. The focus is on identifying potential changes in ecosystem processes (material and energy fluxes, and nutrient cycling) at the coastal ecosystem scale. Potential mechanisms for ecosystem-level effects include the utilization of particulate food resources by cultured bivalves and associated fauna, the subsequent release of unutilized materials in dissolved (urine) and particulate (feces and pseudofeces) form, and the removal of minerals from the system in the bivalve harvest. The potential consequences to coastal ecosystems from intensive bivalve aquaculture are summarized in the following sections. CONTROL OF SUSPENDED PARTICLE DYNAMICS Dense bivalve populations may exert a strong influence on suspended particulate matter (including phytoplankton, detritus, and some auto- and heterotrophic picoplankton and micro-zooplankton) in some coastal systems through their huge capacity to clear
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".