Assessing ecosystem response to phosphorus and nitrogen limitation in the <scp>P</scp>earl <scp>R</scp>iver plume using the <scp>R</scp>egional <scp>O</scp>cean <scp>M</scp>odeling <scp>S</scp>ystem (ROMS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effect of phosphorus limitation on the Pearl River plume ecosystem, where large gradients in both nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) concentrations exist, is investigated in this process‐oriented study by coupling the Regional Ocean Modeling System (ROMS) model with a new nitrogen, phosphorus, phytoplankton, zooplankton, and detritus (NPPZD) ecosystem model. The results of the N‐based only model of Gan et al. (2010) were compared with those of the new NP‐based model for the plume. The inclusion of P‐limitation noticeably reduces the total phytoplankton production in the plume in the P‐limited near and midfield regions of the plume. However, the nitrate in the plume extends farther downstream and forms a broad area of phytoplankton bloom in the N‐limited far field. Moreover, it changes the photosynthetically active radiation and strengthens the subsurface chlorophyll maximum in the near and midfields, but weakens it in the far field. A high N:P ratio of ∼120 in the near field decreases quickly to a low N:P ratio of <13.3 in the far field due to a higher N:P consumption ratio and mixing with ambient waters with a lower N:P ratio. Mortality and coagulation acts as major sinks for phytoplankton production in the near and midfield during the developmental stage of the bloom, but grazing gradually becomes the most important sink for phytoplankton production in the entire plume during the mature stage. It was shown that the magnitudes of the difference between the NP‐based and N‐based cases decrease sequentially for nutrients, phytoplankton, and zooplankton.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".