MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024746783 · doi:10.1139/f07-029

Rate of species introductions in the Great Lakes via ships' ballast water and sediments

2007· article· en· W2024746783 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John M. Drake, David M. Lodge

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Ecology and Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center For Environmental AssessmentU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsBallastZooplanktonAbundance (ecology)EcologyLake ecosystemTaxonBiologyFisherySpecies richnessIntroduced speciesEcosystemEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report results from a study of species in ballast tanks of ships entering the Great Lakes between 2000 and 2002. We collected 1349 individuals from at least 93 unique taxonomic groups, of which approximately half were identified to species. We estimated that the zooplankton assemblage in ballast water destined for the Great Lakes comprised from 200 to 1000 unique taxa consisting of both freshwater and marine species. Between 14 and 39 of these taxa have not yet been recorded from the Great Lakes. Further, 13.9% of individual specimens identified to the species level were from species not previously collected from the Great Lakes. We collected seven nonindigenous freshwater species not currently found in the Great Lakes: Brachionus plicatilis, Cyclocypria kinkaidia, Maraenobiotus insignipes, Microcyclops rubellus, Microcyclops varicans, Neomysis awatchensis, and Paracyclops chiltoni. We found no evidence that ship age, seasonal timing, or age of ballast water affected the abundance of individuals or species in the ballast tanks. To our knowledge, these are the first extrapolations of data from ballast water collections to estimate the rate of species introduction to any ecosystem.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations46
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207