Fish response to the annual flooding regime in the Kavango River along the Angola/Namibian border
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of the first seasonal survey of the fish of the Kavango River flood-plain along the Angola/Namibia border are reported. The river experiences peak flooding from February through June, with the 375-km long floodplain extending up to 5 km across. The floodplain was sampled five times in 1992 by seine, fish traps and rotenone. The data indicated a pronounced structural and functional response of the fish community in relation to the alternating flood and drought conditions in the river. Catch per unit effort and diversity were highest during months of peak flooding (May and June), and lowest during the month of least flow (November). The reproductive strategies of K-selected piscivorous cichlids and tigerfish were in advance of flooding. Many r-selected invertivores, especially cyprinids, were in relative synchrony with flooding and the stimulation of littoral zone plant growth, while other invertivores lagged the cyprinids. Herbivores had lowest relative abundance during peak flooding; this seemingly inverse relationship with the invertivores should not be interpreted as replacement, but rather the swamping of the system with young-of-the-year r-selected invertivores. The data support the Flood Pulse Concept, which hypothesizes that flooding is the major "driver" of productivity in lowland or floodplain rivers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".