MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998765162 · doi:10.1215/21573689-2372976

A mechanistic‐based framework to understand how dissolved organic carbon is processed in a large fluvial lake

2013· article· en· W1998765162 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Massicotte, Jean‐Jacques Frenette

Bibliographic record

VenueLimnology & Oceanography Fluids & Environments · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissolved organic carbonBiogeochemical cycleEnvironmental scienceAquatic ecosystemCarbon cycleEcosystemBiomass (ecology)BacterioplanktonNutrientEnvironmental chemistryFluvialRiver ecosystemTotal organic carbonWater columnSubstrate (aquarium)Nutrient cycleBiogeochemistryCarbon fibersEcologyChemistryPhytoplanktonGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lay Abstract Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) is a fundamental component of the biogeochemical cycling of nutrients in aquatic ecosystems and is the main carbon source supporting bacterial production. The efficiency at which heterotrophic (nonphotosynthetic) bacteria convert this substrate into biomass depends mainly on the quality of DOC in the water column. DOC is constantly processed through various physical, chemical, and biological mechanisms that operate simultaneously and alter its quality. It is paramount to understand how these different processes interact to drive the fate of DOC in aquatic ecosystems. Based on field data collected in a large fluvial lake, we developed and validated a mechanistic model that provides a framework to understand the relative contribution of the main processes involved in both labile (DOCL) and semilabile (DOCSL) DOC pool kinetics. The model revealed that during the downstream flow, each category of DOC pool was processed differently by bacteria: DOCL was preferentially used for biomass production, whereas DOCSL completed bacterial carbon demand. Our results also suggest that a decrease in DOCL abundance will further determine the intake of DOCSL.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLimnology & Oceanography Fluids & EnvironmentsSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207