A field‐derived oxygen isotope fractionation equation for <i>Salvelinus</i> species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field-collected otolith samples of young-of the-year Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) and brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis) and monitored water temperatures were used to estimate a delta(18)O fractionation equation for the genus Salvelinus. When compared to literature reported equations, the developed fractionation equation had a statistically similar slope but dissimilar intercept. Statistical similarities among fractionation equation slope estimates suggest a common otolith delta(18)O incorporation response among fish species that may be interpreted as widespread equilibrium otolith delta(18)O deposition. Statistical dissimilarities among intercept estimates question broad applicability of any single fractionation equation to all fish species and were interpreted here to have biological meaning as a result of known differences in standard metabolic rates among species. Attempts to statistically cross-validate fractionation equations by prediction of water temperatures used in other fractionation studies indicated significant biases in the range of -7.9 to 6.7 degrees C that preclude the broad use of any single fractionation equation for accurate thermal reconstructions. Differences in equation intercepts and the prevalence of predictive biases do not support the conclusion of previous studies concerning the wide applicability and/or general accuracy of fractionation equations and suggest fractionation equations are best developed at the species- or taxon-specific (e.g., genus) level.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".