Science hub · Publications
Tidewright working papers.
The company's own papers and engineering reports — methods, results and failures, published as Tidewright documents. Where a plain-language explainer exists in the Journal, it is linked beside the paper.
TW-WP-2026-04 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2026
MRVblue carbonmethodologyCanopy Ledger MRV Framework v3: Measurement, Reporting and Verification for Restored Kelp Systems
The third revision of Tidewright’s verification framework adds eDNA-derived biodiversity metrics, tightens permanence accounting to decadal monitoring windows, and publishes every canopy-map error bound alongside the headline numbers.
TW-WP-2026-02 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2026
geneticsassisted adaptationgiant kelpGenotype-to-Site Matching Under Marine Heatwave Scenarios: Five Seasons of Tasmanian Evidence
Dr. Elias Brandt, Dr. Theo Nakamura
Across 22 restored reefs, heat-selected giant kelp genotypes retained canopy through the 2024–25 warm season at 2.3× the rate of unselected controls (illustrative program data). We publish the provenance rules that govern when assisted adaptation is acceptable.
TW-WP-2025-09 · Tidewright Engineering Report · 2025
engineeringDrifteroperationsAutonomous Reseeding at Scale: The Drifter Fleet’s First Six Million Metres of Holdfast Line
A public engineering review of six hulls and seven seeding seasons: laying accuracy, storm losses, failure modes, and why the boring details of line tension decide whether a forest lives.
TW-WP-2025-06 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2025
biodiversityeDNAmonitoringDo Restored Forests Rebuild Food Webs? eDNA and Quadrat Evidence from Three Coastlines
Comparing restored sites with reference forests and untreated barrens, we track how quickly fish, invertebrate and cryptic biodiversity returns — and where restoration fails to shortcut succession.
TW-WP-2025-03 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2025
urchin barrensCaliforniafisheriesUrchin Ranching Plus Reseeding: A Two-Handed Model for Barren Reversal in Mendocino
Three seasons of corridor seeding alongside commercial urchin ranching in Northern California: survival curves, barren-edge retreat rates (illustrative), and the economics of aligning a fishery with a forest.
TW-WP-2024-11 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2024
seedstockgiant kelpstormsStorm-Season Retention: Selecting for Holdfast Strength in Giant Kelp Seedstock
Dr. Theo Nakamura, Naomi Reyes
Winter storms, not heat, limit canopy retention at exposed sites. We describe a selection protocol that raised storm-retention of seeded lines by 38% at Catalina pilot sites (illustrative) without trading away heat tolerance.
TW-WP-2024-05 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2024
blue carbonexportaccountingWhere Does Restored Kelp Carbon Actually Go? A Tracer Study of Exported Wrack
Using tagged wrack and sediment cores, we follow restored-forest carbon from canopy to deep sediment — the evidence base behind our conservative credit accounting, and the reason we decline to credit what we cannot trace.
TW-WP-2023-08 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2023
blue carbonadditionalitycreditsAdditionality in Kelp Restoration: A Working Standard
A blunt internal standard, published externally: what we count, what we refuse to count, and the eight tests every Tidewright credit must pass before issue.
TW-WP-2022-04 · Tidewright Working Paper · 2022
remote sensingMRVcanopySatellite Canopy Detection for Emergent Kelp: Calibration Against Diver Surveys
The calibration record behind Canopy Ledger’s canopy maps: where satellites over-read, where they miss, and the diver-verification cadence that keeps the maps honest.
TW-WP-2021-01 · Tidewright Engineering Report · 2021
engineeringseedstockHoldfastHoldfast Lines: Biodegradable Seeding Substrate for Broadcast Kelp Restoration
Naomi Reyes, Dr. Theo Nakamura
The original Holdfast line specification: materials, degradation profile, fouling behaviour, and the voyage from hatchery rack to reef — still the document we hand new engineers first.
Tidewright is a fictional company created as a design and content demonstration. These working papers are part of that demonstration — methods reflect real-world good practice, but the documents, results and identifiers are fictional. Where a paper touches real published science, the Journal’s explainers cite it in general terms rather than inventing citations.