Ok, Timfish. Here in a different thread. The info gets posted again. So, help me understand what I'm missing from the bigger picture.
The abstract reads,
" In situ mesocosm experiments using custom-made benthic chambers placed over different types of benthic communities exhibited identical trends to those found in incubation experiments"
So, in my opinion this tells me that "we" know how to recreate a specific event. Which we as humans do all the time. PH.D. Or whatever, or not. We took a reading of a happening.....went to a lab and recreated it. Or.....a basic understanding of what was observed, came about, and then a test was setup. The result was documented and then those results and test methods were modified. Tents were built and were placed on the ocean floor, readings were then taken. Those readings were close enough to be considered the same. Having not read the book this is my hypothesis of how things went. Simplified that is. 15 years is a long time. Lab work or tents,(in this case) is to much human involvement for me to believe the results or test data.
Then it reads,
"Our results highlight the variability of the influence of different benthic primary producers on microbial metabolism in reef ecosystems and the potential implications for energy transfer to higher trophic levels during shifts from coral to algal dominance on reefs."
Variability.....that's pretty vague. In my opinion anyway. So, some things "may" or may not influence the bacterial community. Yet, the "energy" (life, in my opinion) transfers to a higher trophic level as the surrounding areas shift from a more coral dominate, to a more algal dominate zone..........So, if there is more coral present. Then the planktonic life is lessened. However, when the "bad algae" grows (the algae that's not confined within coral tissue) planktonic life abounds (which means more poop/more waste)......and why not? There's plenty to eat now. Why not move in? Things get more dirty. Slowly shifting to a more bacterial based environment. Living on the sugars produced by the algae. Thus the ebb and flow of life.
Your videos show this very "thing" in action. One tank is full of soft coral. Looks like the same one everywhere in the vid. The other tank is loaded with Xenia. Both of which prefer a high level of nutrients in the water. Xenia has been grown in sumps for a long time as a means of nutrient export.
Please understand, I'm not trying to be an a$$. I am trying to understand what and why this keeps coming up as good info. It and your examples go hand in hand. More algae, the more trophic a system is. Be it in coral or a big ball of macro.
Again, I'm not being rude. My mind works in absolutes. It's black or its white. Just like this text. If info is going to be touted as "truth" then it best not have hoes in it. Everyone takes in info deferently. That perception becomes a reality. Those different realities causes us to seek more information and push the boundaries. I believe it is often the uneducated that pushes said boundaries. Simply because they don't know where the boundaries are supposed to be.
