Effects of clay turbidity and light on the predatorprey interaction between smelts and chaoborids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of clay turbidity and light on the predatorprey interaction between planktivorous smelts (Osmerus eperlanus) and phantom midge (Chaoborus flavicans) larvae were studied by means of laboratory experiments. Irrespective of light intensity, fish-mediated mortality of chaoborid larvae was highest at intermediate turbidity (20 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU)). Increases in light intensity enhanced the feeding rate of smelts at very low light intensities. A regression model describing the dependence of smelt-mediated mortality of chaoborids on light intensity and turbidity was fitted to the data. The model suggested that turbidity exceeding 30 NTU combined with light intensity below 0.1 µE·m2·s1provides an efficient daytime refuge for chaoborids even in the presence of planktivorous smelts. In the field studies, the depth distribution of chaoborids followed the predictions of the model. The depth at which chaoborid density was highest depended on the existence and location of the thermocline, the densest swarms occurring beneath the turbidity maximum in the metalimnion. The smelts occupied water layers above the chaoborids, suggesting that the chaoborids used the steep turbidity gradient in the thermocline as a shelter against predation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".