Factors Controlling Periphyton Accrual during Summer in Headwater Streams of Southwestern British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Abstract In headwater coastal streams of southwestern British Columbia, previous research suggested that light limited periphyton growth and abundance of grazing invertebrates. Logging along a reach of stream allowed us to further examine the importance of light, as well as other abiotic factors, in regulating stream periphyton and grazers. We placed unglazed ceramic tiles in three watershed, two of which served as controls. In the third watershed, we placed tiles in one reach that was newly harvested, as well as in an upstream, forested reach. Tiles were placed in streams in late June and removed weekly over a six-week period for determination of periphyton chlorophyll α and ash-free dry mass. We also measured discharge, dissolved nitrate and phosphate, and counted the number of invertebrate grazers on each removed tile weekly. Peak biomass, as chlorophyll α, was reached on day 29 with alga biomass at the logged site (19 μg m−2) seven to fourteen times higher than at the control sites. Stepwise, multiple linear regression suggested that light was the single best predictor explaining 64% of the variation in peak biomass of chlorophyll a Although periphyton biomass on tiles was much higher in the clearcut reach, so was fine sediment. Inorganic mass entrapped in the periphyton mat was two to four times higher in the clearcut stream than at other sites. Grazer abundance was not related to periphyton biomass, but was negatively related to sediment levels. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that grazer abundance was determined by sediment levels rather than alga biomass.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 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 teacher head, 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".