MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing plankton and other particles in situ with the SOLOPC

2008· article· en· W2059106834 on OpenAlexaff
David M. Checkley, Russ E. Davis, Alex W. Herman, George A. Jackson, B. Beanlands, L. A. Regier

Bibliographic record

VenueLimnology and Oceanography · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsDiel vertical migrationPlanktonZooplanktonOceanographyParticle (ecology)Environmental scienceRange (aeronautics)Particle sizeNoonParticle-size distributionAtmospheric sciencesPhysicsGeologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We combined a Sounding Oceanographic Lagrangian Observer float with a Laser Optical Plankton Counter (LOPC) and a fluorometer to make an autonomous biological profiler, the SOLOPC. The instrument senses plankton and other particles over a size range of 100 µm to 1 cm in profiles to 300 m in depth and sends data ashore via satellite. Objects sensed by the LOPC include aggregates and zooplankton, the larger of which can be distinguished from one another by their transparency. We hypothesized that the diel production of particles and their loss by sinking and grazing are reflected in the change of the particle distribution. We present data from four deployments of the SOLOPC off California. Particle volume was maximal at the base of the surface mixed layer and correlated with chlorophyll a fluorescence. In a 3‐d deployment in 2005, particle volume was greatest in the early evening and smallest in the morning, and average particle size increased with depth. Eigenvector analysis of the particle volume distribution as a function of diameter for each of the deployments yielded size peaks characteristic of planktonic crustaceans. Ship‐based measurements showed that the abundance of opaque particles of 1.1‐1.7 mm equivalent spherical diameter was positively correlated with copepods of this size and simultaneously collected in nets. This relationship was used with SOLOPC data to estimate the distribution of large copepods, which were most abundant beneath the depth of maximal particle flux, estimated from particle size and published sinking rates. Our data are consistent with a model with diel production of particles and their loss by sinking and grazing.

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)0.000
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations77
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLimnology and OceanographySame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207