On the roles of cell size and trophic strategy in North Atlantic diatom and dinoflagellate communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have examined the inter‐ and intra‐group seasonal succession of 113 diatom and dinoflagellate taxa, as surveyed by the Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) in the North Atlantic, by grouping taxa according to two key functional traits: cell size (µg C cell−1) and trophic strategy (photoautotrophy, mixotrophy, or heterotrophy). Mixotrophic dinoflagellates follow photoautotrophic diatoms but precede their obligate heterotrophic counterparts in the succession because of the relative advantages afforded by photosynthesizing when light and nutrients are available in spring. The mean cell size of the sampled diatoms is smallest in the summer, likely because of the higher specific nutrient affinity of smaller relative to larger cells. Contrastingly, we hypothesize that mixotrophy diminishes the size selection based on nutrient limitation and accounts for the lack of a seasonal size shift among surveyed dinoflagellates. Relatively small, heterotrophic dinoflagellates (µg C cell−1 < 10−3) peak after other, larger dinoflagellates, in part because of the increased abundance of their small prey during nutrient‐deplete summer months. The largest surveyed diatoms (µg C cell−1 > 10−2) bloom later than others, and we hypothesize that this may be because of their relatively slow maximum potential growth rates and high internal nutrient storage, as well as to the slower predation of these larger cells. The new trait database and analysis presented here helps translate the taxonomic information of the CPR survey into metrics that can be directly compared with trait‐based models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".