Linking shrimp assemblages with rates of detrital processing along an elevational gradient in a tropical stream
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We experimentally excluded freshwater shrimp assemblages (Atyidae, Xiphocarididae, and Palaemonidae) to examine their effects on detrital processing and benthic insect biomass at three sites along an elevational gradient in a tropical stream in Puerto Rico. We also determined which shrimp taxon was responsible for leaf decay in a subsequent laboratory experiment. At the high-elevation site, the shrimp assemblage was dominated by Atya spp. and Xiphocaris elongata, and leaf decay rates were significantly faster in the presence of shrimps than in their absence. Laboratory experiments showed that this was primarily due to direct consumption of leaves by Xiphocaris. Shrimps had no effect on leaf decay rates at mid- and low-elevation sites where there were higher proportions of Macrobrachium spp. shrimps (which prey on Xiphocaris). Laboratory experiments showed that Xiphocaris consumed significantly less leaf material and experienced significantly higher mortality in the presence of Macrobrachium. Shrimp exclusion resulted in significantly less and significantly more insect biomass at the high- and low-elevation sites, respectively; no difference was found at the mid-elevation site. Insects played a minor role in leaf decay. Results show a strong linkage between shrimp assemblages and rates of detrital decay and illustrate the importance of conducting experiments at multiple sites.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".