The Bioenergetic Consequences of Invasive-Induced Food Web Disruption to Lake Ontario Alewives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Alewives Alosa pseudoharengus are the dominant prey fish in Lake Ontario, and their response to ecological change can alter the structure and function of the Lake Ontario food web. Using stochastic population-based bioenergetic models of Lake Ontario alewives for 1987–1991 and 2001–2005, we evaluated changes to alewife production, consumption, and associated bioenergetic ratios after invasive-induced food web disruption. After the disruption, mean biomass of alewives declined from 28.0 to 14.6 g/m2, production declined from 40.8 to 13.6 g·m−2·year−1, and consumption declined from 342.1 to 137.2 g·m−2·year−1, but bootstrapping of error sources suggested that the changes were not statistically significant. Population-based bioenergetic ratios of production to biomass (P/B ratio), total consumption to biomass (Q/B ratio), and production efficiency did not change. Pathways of energy flow measured as prey-group-specific Q/B ratios changed significantly between the two time periods for invasive predatory cladocerans (from 0.6 to 1.3), Mysis diluviana (from 0.4 to 2.5), and other prey (from 0.8 to 0.1), but the observed decline in the zooplankton Q/B ratio (from 10.6 to 5.5) was not significant. Gross production efficiency did not change; values ranged from 8% to 15%. Age-group mean gross conversion efficiency (GCE) declined with age; GCE ranged from 7.5% to 11.0% for yearlings, was approximately 5% for age-2 alewives, and was less than 2% for age-3 and older alewives. The GCE increased significantly between the time periods for yearling alewives. Our analyses support the hypothesis that after 2003, alewives could not sustain their growth while feeding on zooplankton closer to shore. Modeling of observed spatial variation in diet and alternative occupied temperatures demonstrates the potential for reducing consumption by alewives. Our results suggest that Lake Ontario alewives can exploit spatial heterogeneity in resource patches and thermal habitat to partially mitigate the effects of food web disruption. Fish management implications are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".