MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078822428 · doi:10.1163/157075408784648808

Ontogenetic and fertilizer effects on stable isotopes in the green frog (Rana clamitans)

2008· article· en· W2078822428 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dale M. Jefferson, Ronald W. Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Herpetology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEcologyMetamorphosisLarvaOntogenyδ15NTrophic levelIsotope analysisTadpole (physics)HabitatStable isotope ratioZoologyδ13C

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anurans undergo dramatic morphological and physiological changes at metamorphosis, accompanied by shifts in diet and habitat. Frogs provide an ideal model organism for studying ontogenetic shifts in diet due to their biphasic life history and widespread distribution throughout their range. Analysis of stable isotopes of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) in green frog tadpoles and adult frogs was used to describe ontogenetic shifts in diet and habitat. Adult and larval green frogs were collected from four wetland locations in Nova Scotia, Canada and analyzed for stable isotopes. Differences in isotopic ratios were observed among tadpoles and adults. Tadpoles from wetlands with high nitrate concentrations exhibited greater δ15N values than adults, while tadpoles from wetlands without N enrichment had lower δ15N values. These enriched nitrogen signatures were probably the result of larval exposure to nitrogenous pollution originating from fertilizers and illustrate the difficulties in using isotope analysis to quantify trophic structure in biphasic organisms occupying dramatically different habitats.

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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied HerpetologySame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207