Temporal Patterns of Arctic and Subarctic Zooplankton Community Composition in Jones Sound, Canadian Arctic Archipelago (1961–62, 1963)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An analysis of overwinter (1961–62) and early summer (1963) collections of zooplankton in Jones Sound, Canadian Arctic Archipelago, found 31 life forms and species, of which 11 species of copepods were dominant. The collections are the earliest on record from the archipelago. These 50-year-old data form a historical base that may assist in analyzing impacts of changing patterns of sea ice distributions. Water-mass-diagnostic copepod species in this study varied with the seasons; those with boreal Atlantic-Subarctic water affinities were present in the winter, but absent or few in number in the summer. Those with Arctic Basin water affinities were few or absent in winter but present or found in greater numbers in the summer. These variations in copepod species may be related to varying presence or proportions of boreal Atlantic water or Arctic Basin water in Jones Sound as also suggested by concurrent physical and chemical oceanographic data. The copepod species found in Jones Sound are also present or dominant in comparable Arctic waters from East Greenland to the Beaufort Sea and in the Arctic Basin, as reported elsewhere, and all reports differ significantly in the relative numbers of the species present from season to season or year to year. Such differences within Jones Sound are documented between the data reported here and those from the summer of 1980 reported elsewhere. It is suggested that these variations also reflect the differing presence or proportions of boreal Atlantic and Arctic Basin water. The conclusion is that Jones Sound and other High Arctic waters are subject to the presence or absence of Arctic Basin waters and boreal Atlantic waters and that the composition of the copepod communities is indicative of those changes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".