Mercury Bioaccumulation in Forage Fish Communities Invaded by Rainbow Smelt (<i>Osmerus mordax)</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared total mercury concentrations ([Hg]) among 6 forage fish species in 25 central Canadian lakes and related [Hg] to adjusted-delta15N (an index of trophic position), delta13C, growth rate, and a suite of environmental variables. Growth rates were also compared among species and related to environmental variables. We found that rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax), a recent invader in many of these lakes, had intermediate [Hg] and growth rates relative to other species. Forage fish growth rates differed significantly among species and were related to latitude (inverse relationship) and lake conductivity (positive relationship). Mercury concentrations also differed significantly among species and the strongest predictors were growth rate and lake conductivity; [Hg] was significantly and negatively related to both. Adjusted-delta15N explained very little variation in [Hg] and was significant only when the analysis was restricted to biotic variables. These results indicate that biomagnification may not be observed at fine scales of trophic differentiation and that rainbow smelt are unlikely to cause post-invasion [Hg] increases in most predatory fish species.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".