A new look at the Lake Superior biomass size spectrum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We synthesized data from multiple sampling programs and years to describe the Lake Superior pelagic biomass size structure. Data consisted of Coulter counts for phytoplankton, optical plankton counts for zooplankton, and acoustic surveys for pelagic prey fish. The size spectrum was stable across two time periods separated by 5 years. The primary scaling or overall slope of the normalized biomass size spectra for the combined years was −1.113, consistent with a previous estimate for Lake Superior (−1.10). Periodic dome structures within the overall biomass size structure were fit to polynomial regressions based on the observed sub-domes within the classical taxonomic positions (algae, zooplankton, and fish). This interpretation of periodic dome delineation was aligned more closely with predator–prey size relationships that exist within the zooplankton (herbivorous, predacious) and fish (planktivorous, piscivorous) taxonomic positions. Domes were spaced approximately every 3.78 log10 units along the axis and with a decreasing peak magnitude of −4.1 log10 units. The relative position of the algal and herbivorous zooplankton domes predicted well the subsequent biomass domes for larger predatory zooplankton and planktivorous prey fish.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".