MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991980710 · doi:10.1139/f02-122

Functional plasticity of benthic macroinvertebrates: implications for trophic dynamics in acid streams

2002· article· en· W1991980710 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olivier Dangles

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Science Foundation
KeywordsBenthic zoneTrophic levelFood webInvertebrateEcologyBiologyDetritusSTREAMSGeneralist and specialist speciesBiomass (ecology)PeriphytonEcosystemHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Functional plasticity of benthic macroinvertebrates was investigated over one year in four acid streams in the Vosges Mountains (northeastern France). The trophic position of macroinvertebrate species within the benthic food web was determined using gut content analyses. Diet analyses revealed that only 24–36% of biomass of putative shredders consumed leaf fragments, whereas up to 44% consumed benthic algae and bryophytes. Although most Nemouromorpha stoneflies were generalist consumers, several other taxa (e.g., Brachyptera seticornis, Chaetopterygopsis maclachlani) specialised on benthic algae and bryophytes. Our study showed that acid streams unexpectedly had very few specialised leaf-shredding species (e.g., Chaetopteryx villosa) that could explain the slow leaf detritus processing rates observed in these systems. Primary producers appear to be an alternative resource for shredders, playing an important role in supporting food webs in forested acid streams. The food web built in this study suggests that overlooking species-specific functional plasticity of invertebrates may result in a misconception of invertebrate community structure in acid streams.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations89
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFrench-language works237,207