MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065095161 · doi:10.1139/f04-190

Exploration of riffle-scale interactions between abiotic variables and microbial assemblages in the hyporheic zone

2005· article· en· W2065095161 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Lucie Sliva

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDownwellingRiffleHyporheic zoneUpwellingAbiotic componentSedimentEcologyFlow (mathematics)Environmental scienceGeologyBiologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular methods were applied to explore the composition of hyporheic bacterial assemblages and their possible interaction with interstitial physicochemical variables. Hyporheic flows on a riffle were manipulated (a downwelling zone was converted to an upwelling zone and vice versa) in order to examine the influence of vertical flow patterns on microbial assemblages. Bacterial assemblages were heterogeneously distributed throughout the riffle, the greatest similarity among them occurring at similar depths rather than in areas of similar flow regimes (upwelling versus downwelling). There was no correlation between the measured physicochemical variables and the microbial assemblages, with the exception of depth and sediment particle size. The flow manipulation in the original downwelling zone appeared to have had an effect on the microbial assemblages, although this influence may have been primarily due to a change in temperature in the manipulated region rather than an alteration of the vertical-flow direction per se.

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 score0.003
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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207