Mercury accumulation in the fish community of a sub‐Arctic lake in relation to trophic position and carbon sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1 Stable isotope analysis has improved understanding of trophic relationships among biota. Coupled with contaminant analysis, stable isotope analysis has also been used for tracing the pattern and extent of biomagnification of contaminants in aquatic food webs. 2 Combined analysis of nitrogen (δ 15 N) and carbon (δ 13 C) isotopes from fish species in a sub-Arctic lake were related to tissue mercury (Hg) concentrations to assess whether carbon sources influenced Hg accumulation in fish, in addition to trophic position. 3 Statistical models were used to estimate Hg biomagnification and uptake, to elucidate Hg accumulation dynamics and to appraise the relative importance of Hg exposure routes for the fish species. 4 Species Hg contamination increased as a function of trophic position (δ 15 N) and was inversely related to the δ 13 C signature. Species connected to the benthic food chain had lower Hg concentrations than species connected to the pelagic food chain. Species undergoing ontogenetic dietary shifts with increasing size, e.g. lake trout Salvelinus namaycush , also showed increased Hg concentrations with increasing reliance on pelagic fish as prey. 5 The results indicate that both vertical (trophic) and horizontal (habitat) food web structure influence Hg concentrations in fish tissue. 6 The biomagnification and uptake models indicated that contamination at the base of the food chain in the lake exceeded estimates for more southerly environments, thereby demonstrating the importance of dietary and water column Hg exposure routes in the sub-Arctic for determining Hg concentrations in fish. 7 Overall, the data reported here demonstrate how a combination of ecological concepts (food webs), developing ecological methods (stable isotopes) and environmental geochemistry can combine profitably to indicate the risks of exposure to environmental contaminants. Additional studies of the dynamics of Hg accumulation in the food webs of sub-Arctic lakes are needed, particularly in the light of the estimated high biomagnification rates and the heavy reliance of Inuit communities on subsistence fish harvests.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".