Responses of a lake outlet community to light and nutrient manipulation: effects on periphyton and invertebrate biomass and composition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Experimental channels were installed at the outlet of a small Canadian Shield lake to study the role of light and nutrients on the regulation of periphyton and invertebrate biomass and taxonomic composition. Light (93% reduction) and nutrients (four‐fold increase of ambient total phosphorus (TP) concentration) were manipulated in a factorial design experiment. 2. Periphyton chlorophyll a (Chl a), measured four times during the 12‐week experiment, increased due to higher irradiance but was unaffected by phosphorus enrichment. Over the experiment, periphyton biomass was, on average, three times higher in open than in shaded channels. 3. Algal taxonomic and growth form composition were affected by light and phosphorus enrichment. The proportion of cyanophytes was significantly higher in unenriched, shaded channels (45%) compared to the three other treatments. Single cells and colonial forms were dominant in shaded channels, whereas filamentous and chain‐forming algae were prevalent in open channels. 4. Total invertebrate biomass remained unchanged over time and among treatments. At the beginning of the experiment, all the channels were dominated by Chironomidae and filter feeders (Simuliidae and Hydropsychidae). After 55 days, filter feeders became clearly dominant (60%) in all treatments except in the enriched, open channels where there was a significant shift in the functional group composition toward grazers (snails and oligochaetes). Among filter feeders, Simuliidae increased in shaded channels.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".