Interactions between mussel bed area and perimeter predict the response of associated communities and ecosystem functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In terrestrial habitats, the Equilibrium Theory of Island Biogeography and Metapopulation Theory have incorporated the effect of area and isolation to explain patch-occupancy dynamics. More recent theories predict effects of fragmentation on communities from the more complex interplay between size of habitat area and edge. As patch area decreases, the relative proportion of edge increases, with corresponding increase in the perimeter-area ratio (P/A ratio). However, few studies have explicitly addressed the independent and interacting effects of perimeter and area on community and ecosystem dynamics. This study aimed to disentangle the relative effects of perimeter, area and their interaction on the structure of the macro-invertebrates community associated with mussel beds and on ecosystem functions measured by nutrient fluxes. We conducted our experiment along the coast of the St Lawrence estuary (Sainte-Flavie, Quebec). Live blue mussels were used to create artificial mussel transplants corresponding to nine combinations of area and perimeter, in a factorial design. Area and perimeter effects on biodiversity and on fluxes of oxygen and ammonium were assessed. The interaction between area and perimeter was found to affect community characteristics and ammonium release. This project also reveals scale-dependence in the effect of habitat shape metrics and suggests that communities and ecosystem processes can be decoupled in their response to changes in perimeter and area. This study underlines the importance of integrating the interactive effects of various metrics of landscape geometry to the study of the relationship between community dynamics and ecosystem functions in fragmented habitats.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".