Comparison of methods to determine algal δ<sup>13</sup>C in freshwater
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To accurately assess the flux of mass and energy to higher trophic levels in a food web using stable isotopes, the isotopic signature of basal sources is required. When studying aquatic food webs, it is difficult to obtain a signature for algae because of challenges associated with isolating small organisms from a bulk sample. In this study, we compared freshwater algal δ 13 C values obtained using five approaches from the literature. Results indicated that the signatures derived from a primary consumer such as Daphnia sp., from particulate organic carbon with a correction for algal biomass, and from isolated algal samples were comparable. By contrast, algal δ 13 C values based on the signature of carbon dioxide and algal carbon fractionation were significantly lower than those of the other approaches. The inconsistent values produced by this method were likely due to problems in determining fractionation values based on current models and were potentially related to bicarbonate uptake by algae.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it