MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010441677 · doi:10.4081/jlimnol.2002.1

Freshwater autotrophic picoplankton: a review

2002· review· es· W2010441677 on OpenAlexaff
Cristiana Callieri, John G. Stockner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Limnology · 2002
Typereview
Languagees
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsTSO Logic (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPicoplanktonTrophic levelEcologyAutotrophTrophic cascadeFood webEcosystemEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)Apex predatorFreshwater ecosystemBiologyPhytoplanktonNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autotrophic picoplankton (APP) are distributed worldwide and are ubiquitous in all types of lakes of varying trophic state. APP are major players in carbon production in all aquatic ecosystems, including extreme environments such as cold ice-covered and/or warm tropical lakes and thermal springs. They often form the base of complex microbial food webs, becoming prey for a multitude of protozoan and micro-invertebrate grazers, that effectively channel APP carbon to higher trophic levels including fish. In this review we examine the existing literature on freshwater autotrophic picoplankton, setting recent findings and current ecological issues within an historic framework, and include a description of the occurrence and distribution of both single-cell and colonial APP (picocyanobacteria) in different types of lakes. In this review we place considerable emphasis on methodology and ecology, including sampling, counting, preservation, molecular techniques, measurement of photosynthesis, and include extensive comment on their important role in microbial food webs. The model outlined by Stockner of an increase of APP abundance and biomass and a decrease of its relative importance with the increase of phosphorus concentration in lakes has been widely accepted, and only recently confirmed in marine and freshwater ecosystems. Nevertheless the relationship which drives the APP presence and importance in lakes of differing trophic status appears with considerable variation so we must conclude that the success of APP in oligotrophic lakes worldwide is not a certainty but highly probable.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations270
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of LimnologySame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207