Difficulties in relating Cd concentrations in the predatory insect<i>Chaoborus</i>to those of its prey in nature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because Chaoborus larvae take up most of their cadmium (Cd) from food, we tested the hypothesis that Cd concentrations in this insect are directly related to those in their planktonic prey. We measured Cd in Chaoborus and in zooplankton collected from 24 eastern Canadian lakes varying widely in their Cd concentrations. Cd concentrations in the predator were not correlated with those in bulk zooplankton, whether separated into size fractions liable to be eaten by Chaoborus or not. In highly acidic lakes, Cd concentrations in Chaoborus did not respond to increases in zooplankton Cd because of either competition between H and Cd ions at Cd absorption sites in the predator's gut or differences in prey community composition between highly acidic and circumneutral lakes. Relationships between Cd in Chaoborus and in its potential prey were stronger when we used Cd concentrations for specific crustacean taxa in a mechanistic model. We conclude that predictive relationships between metal concentrations in predators and their prey are likely to be strongest if the subset of prey consumed by the predator has been characterized and if this information is used in a bioaccumulation model.
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 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".