MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079372009 · doi:10.1080/02705060.2005.9664949

Temporal Variation in Algal Communities in an Intermittent Pond

2005· article· en· W2079372009 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Czesia Nalewajko, Árni Magnússon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Freshwater Ecology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAlgaeChlorophytaGenusTaxonBiologyCyanobacteriaEcologyBotanyCommunity structureGreen algaeBloomPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We examined the algal communities in an intermittent pond in southern Ontario, Canada, at one permanently wetted site and two that dried up. Samples were collected from decomposing leaves and from the water column from ice-out in April to late August. Most of the algae present were attached forms. While there were some differences at the genus level, both temporary and permanent sites were largely dominated by filamentous chlorophytes (e.g., Oedogonium genera) immediately after ice-out. Subsequent to this early season bloom, the communities became more taxon rich, with diatoms (especially Pinnularia spp.) predominating at the permanent site, which also supported the highest diversity (30 genera). At the genus level, the community composition at the intermittent sites were subsets of that found at the permanent site. Many of these genera are known to produce a gelatinous matrix, or have a partially gelatinous structure—both advantageous to surviving drought. Using cell counts, the Cyanophyta (Cyanobacteria) appeared to be the most important community constituents; however, biovolume showed that the Chlorophyta and Bacillariophyta were the dominant groups.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Freshwater EcologySame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207