Distribution of biofilm exopolymeric substances in littoral sediments of Canadian Shield lakes: the effects of light and substrate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benthic algal and microbial communities release organic compounds that perform many important functions in food webs and nutrient dynamics. In this study we compared the content and composition of extracellular substances from different types of sediments in the shallow littoral areas of clear and dark Canadian Shield lakes. We report high content of extracellular substances in these littoral sediments, in terms of both carbohydrates and proteins. Total carbohydrate contents increased with increasing sediment chlorophyll content in a relationship very similar to that reported for marine intertidal mudflats. Light availability and sediment type affected the content and composition of exopolymeric substances (EPS) in complex ways. More loosely bound (colloidal) EPS were measured in sandy sediments of dark lakes. Colloidal EPS content did not vary with changes in sediment particle size in clear lakes but may have been positively related to sediment particle size in dark lakes. Tightly bound (capsular) EPS increased with sediment water content with no effect of light availability. These relationships are consistent across the seven lakes. The role of these carbo hydrates and proteins in the productivity and nutrient dynamics of littoral areas in lakes remains to be tested.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".