Abundance, biomass and estimated production of planktonic ciliates in Lakes Victoria and Malawi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The abundance, biomass and composition of planktonic ciliates were studied in two Great Lakes of Africa, Malawi and Victoria, between June, 1997, and June, 1999, to investigate their role in the food webs of these lakes. Oligotrichs (Strombidium , Strobilidium and Halteria) were the most abundant group of ciliates in both lakes. Other important ciliates in terms of abundance and/or biomass included heterotrichs, peritrichs, haptorids, and peniculids. Mean ciliate abundance was 1.5 ciliates · mL−1 and 20.1 ciliates · mL−1 in Lakes Malawi and Victoria, respectively. Ciliate biomass ranged from 0.03 to 7.82 μg C · L−1 (mean 1.8 ± 0.7 μg C · L−1) in Lake Malawi and ranged from 24.2 to 61.82 μg C · L−1 (mean 36 μg C · L−1) in Lake Victoria. Ciliate abundance and biomass were higher at offshore than inshore stations of both lakes despite that chlorophyll exhibited the opposite trend. Both lakes demonstrated vertical and temporal variation in their ciliate communities as well. Herbivores were an important feeding guild in both lakes, while mixotrophs and bacterivores were also important in Lakes Malawi and Victoria, respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".