MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062405278 · doi:10.1130/g34194.1

Influence of bedrock mineral composition on microbial diversity in a subglacial environment

2013· article· en· W2062405278 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew C. Mitchell, Melissa J. Lafrenière, Mark Skidmore, Eric S. Boyd

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPolar Research and Ecology
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBedrockDiversity (politics)Library scienceState (computer science)Composition (language)ArchaeologyGeographyGeologySociologyArtAnthropologyGeomorphologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microorganisms in subglacial environments drive the chemical weathering of bedrock; however, the influence of bedrock mineralogy on the composition and activity of microbial assemblages in such environments is poorly understood. Here, using a combination of in situ mineral incubation and DNA fingerprinting techniques, we demonstrate that pyrite is the dominant mineralogical control on subglacial bacterial community structure and composition. In addition, we show that the abundance of Fe in the incubated minerals influences the development of mineral-associated biomass. The ubiquitous nature of pyrite in many common bedrock types and high SO42– concentrations in most glacial meltwaters suggest that pyrite may be a dominant lithogenic control on microbial communities in many subglacial systems. Mineral-based energy may therefore serve a fundamental role in sustaining subglacial microbial populations and enabling their persistence over glacial-interglacial time scales.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations114
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologySame topicPolar Research and EcologyFrench-language works237,207