Wind on lakes brings predator and prey together in the pelagic zone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wind blowing over the pelagic zones of stratified lakes creates recirculating water currents. In Lake Opeongo, we observed the effects of these currents on four different trophic levels using a variety of methods (acoustic Doppler current profiler, optical plankton counter, hydroacoustics, telemetry, and netting programs). During windy events, (1) water currents were stronger than the known swimming speeds of small zooplankton (355 to 399 μm) but not larger species or fish, (2) large zooplankton (>542 μm) and schooling planktivores congregated at the thermocline at the downwind end of the basin, and (3) large piscivores directed their foraging towards areas exposed to wind, where they appeared to acquire the same meal as under calm weather conditions but with less effort. We propose that (i) the horizontal physical homogeneity of pelagic zones, (ii) the slow swimming ability of zooplankton relative to the speed of wind-induced water currents, and (iii) the likely growth benefits to predators of foraging on patches of prey lead to the downwind aggregation of pelagic organisms. We discuss this conceptual framework with examples from both lake and ocean ecosystems to suggest that this phenonenon occurs across a large range of spatial scales in aquatic ecosystems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".