Phytoplankton community assessment in eight Lake Ontario tributaries made using fluorimetric methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coastal inputs of nutrients and contaminants impact phytoplankton community composition and health in localized and large areas of coastal Lake Ontario. Advanced fluorimetric instrumentation (Fast Repetition Rate Fluorimeter [FRRF], FluoroProbe) was used during June 2006 to assess the in situ phytoplankton community of eight tributaries of Lake Ontario (Chaumont Bay, Sacketts Harbor/Black River, Oswego River, Port Bay, Sodus Bay, Irondequoit Bay, Genesee River, and Eighteen Mile Creek) representing a range of geomorphological features (rivers, protected embayments, open embayments). The instrumentation enabled high resolution (160 m) continuous monitoring of phytoplankton community composition (FluoroProbe) and photosynthetic efficiency (FRRF) along 1 m deep transect from nearshore (coastal Lake Ontario, > 7 m depth) to inshore (within the tributary, < 7 m depth). Limnological parameters such as water temperature, colored dissolved organic matter content (CDOM), total phosporus, nitrate, chloride, light extinction coefficient, and extracted size fractionated (0.2–2 μ m, 2–20 μ m, > 20 μ m) chlorophyll a concentrations were also determined. Results from this study illustrate the strong environmental gradients that exist along tributary transition zones into Lake Ontario. Offshore water quality was homogeneous and reflected nutrients levels (e.g. total phosphorus) that were below the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement target value (10 μ g per litre), whereas most tributary inputs had elevated nutrient and chloride levels. Phytoplankton community composition differed between inshore and offshore sites and the transition coincided with changing water quality (followed using water temperature and CDOM concentrations) at the interface of the surface water masses. The greatest observed photosynthetic efficiencies occurred in the inshore environment; this is attributed to the greater nutrient availability rather than lower light levels. Fluorimetric applications provide useful techniques for monitoring water quality. Given the observed diversity of phytoplankton community and health among these tributary inputs, it follows that monitoring capabilities using the instrumentation applied here should be enhanced to observe these systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".