Validating methods for measuring <i>δ</i> <sup>18</sup> O and <i>δ</i> <sup>13</sup> C in otoliths from freshwater fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability of the phosphoric acid digestion technique to extract carbon dioxide from biogenic carbonates and reliably reproduce delta(18)O and delta(13)C signatures from standard reference materials (NBS-18, NBS-19) was tested and shown to produce accurate, unbiased measurements of non-biologic materials. The effects of roasting preparation methods commonly reported when analyzing biogenic carbonates were also tested in a series of experiments using reference standards and otoliths obtained from aquacultured Arctic charr and rainbow trout. Roasting had no effect on the isotope measurement of reference standards. No significant differences between mean oxygen isotope signatures from paired experiments with roasted and non-roasted fish otoliths were found. However, otolith oxygen isotope measurements were significantly enriched in comparison to rearing water-based measurements for both species. Agreement between expected isotopic equilibrium and measured otolith delta(18)O values varied as a function of roasting temperature and between species. Criteria for the selection of appropriate roasting temperatures are suggested and favour 350 degrees C in freshwater fish where unbiased estimates of average rearing water temperatures and known differences in rearing temperatures were obtained. Carbon isotopic disequilibria were observed for both species. A mixing model analysis established differences in the percentage of metabolically derived carbon in studied otoliths, with Arctic charr deriving a greater proportion of otolith delta(13)C from metabolism as a result of higher metabolic rates.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".