MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044349817 · doi:10.1002/jqs.1296

Postglacial chironomid assemblage succession in northernmost Ungava Peninsula, Canada

2009· article· en· W2044349817 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Émilie Saulnier‐Talbot, Reinhard Pienitz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Quaternary Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCenter for Northern Studies
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyEcological successionArcticDominance (genetics)BayChironomidaeEcologyOceanographyPhysical geographyGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sediment cores spanning the postglacial period were recovered from two coastal freshwater basins located 300 km apart in northernmost Ungava (Nunavik, Canada). A basal date from the sequence recovered near Wakeham Bay suggests that the region was ice‐free by as early as 9600 cal. a BP. The initial development of both investigated lacustrine ecosystems was characterised by chironomid assemblages strongly dominated by the Subtribe Tanytarsina. These early postglacial assemblages showed greatly reduced diversity but much greater abundance than during subsequent periods of lake evolution. An abrupt and distinct turnover in sedimentary chironomid assemblage composition and productivity, marked by a switch to a dominance of Orthocladiinae, occurred around 6 ka BP. This turnover likely corresponds with a significant disturbance in the regional environment, which could be linked to the final disappearance of the last remnants of the Laurentide Ice Sheet. These findings, based on the first palaeolimnological investigations undertaken in northernmost Ungava, provide new insights into lateglacial and postglacial faunal recolonisation patterns in aquatic ecosystems of the eastern Canadian Arctic. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Quaternary ScienceSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207