MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1563825632 · doi:10.1029/2011jg001891

A conceptual model for the blooming behavior and persistence of the benthic mat‐forming diatom<i>Didymosphenia geminata</i> in oligotrophic streams

2012· article· en· W1563825632 on OpenAlexafffund
James Cullis, Carole‐Anne Gillis, Max L. Bothwell, Cathy Kilroy, Aaron I. Packman, Marwan A. Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignUniversity of British ColumbiaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDiatomEcologySTREAMSBenthic zoneEnvironmental scienceEcosystemRiver ecosystemPrimary producersBiomass (ecology)PeriphytonHabitatEcosystem engineerBiologyPhytoplanktonNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The benthic, mat‐forming diatomDidymosphenia geminata has the unique ability to produce large amounts of algal biomass under oligotrophic conditions in cold, fast flowing streams and rivers. This presents an ecological paradox that challenges our current understanding of stream ecosystem dynamics. Our understanding of the drivers of D. geminata ecology is still limited. Here we present a conceptual model for the blooming behavior and persistence of this species to advance scientific understanding of strategies for life in fast flowing oligotrophic waters and support the design of future research and mitigation measures for nuisance algal blooms. The conceptual model is based on a synthesis of data and ideas from a range of disciplines including hydrology, geomorphology, biogeochemistry, and ecology. The conceptual model highlights the role of water chemistry, river morphology, and flow thresholds in defining the habitat window for D. geminata. We propose that bed disturbance is a primary control on accumulation and persistence of D. geminataand that the removal threshold can be determined by synthesizing site‐specific information on hydrology and geomorphology. Further, we propose that a key to understanding the didymo paradox is the separation of cellular reproduction and mat morphology with specific controls acting in respect of the different processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFrench-language works237,207