Crustacean zooplankton in lakes and reservoirs of temperate and tropical regions: variation with trophic status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of trophic status on the crustacean zooplankton community was investigated in lakes and reservoirs in temperate and subtropical-tropical regions. We tested if there is a consistent relationship between crustacean species richness, assemblages, and abundance and trophic indices such as total phosphorus and chlorophyll a. We also examined if these patterns differ between regions. Cumulative species richness and assemblages varied among regions. The greatest number of crustacean species was found in the temperate oligotrophic region with the largest number of lakes sampled. However, cumulative species richness was similar in temperate and subtropicaltropical regions when comparing subsets with a similar number of lakes and reservoirs. The relationships between species richness and latitude or trophic status were difficult to assess owing to imbalance among regions in number of lakes and reservoirs sampled and to biogeography and fish predation potential influences. Trophic status was associated with changes in abundance of all major crustacean zooplankton groups. Eutrophic ecosystems supported greater crustacean abundances at all latitudes. However, cladocerans and cyclopoids were more abundant in eutrophic lakes and reservoirs, whereas calanoids were more abundant in temperate oligotrophic lakes. Total phosphorus was found to be a better predictor of the biomass of major crustacean groups than chlorophyll a in all regions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".