Influence of macroinvertebrates on physico‐chemical and microbial processes in hyporheic sediments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objective of this study was to measure the effects of invertebrates on the physical characteristics and microbial processes in hyporheic sediments. We investigated the impacts of an assemblage of three taxa (asellids, chironomid larvae, and tubificid worms) on sediment distribution, water fluxes, sediment organic carbon, biofilm (attached bacteria) characteristics, and O2, dissolved organic carbon NO3−, NO2−, and NH4+ concentrations in slow filtration sand–gravel columns. The results showed that invertebrates clearly modified the distribution of particles in the sediment column, probably because of the structures (tubes, macropores, and faecal pellets) produced by the three taxa in the sediment. Our assessment of water fluxes indicated that invertebrate activities led to an increase in the porosity of the sediment columns. In addition, aerobic (O2 consumption) and anaerobic (denitrification and fermentative decomposition of organic matter) microbial processes occurring in the sediment were stimulated in the presence of invertebrates. Finally, the present study demonstrates that invertebrates can act as ecosystem engineers in heterogeneous sediments that are under the influence of an advective flux of water. The solute residence time increased in columns containing the faunal assemblage. Micro‐organisms used more dissolved organic matter and nutrients in the presence of invertebrates because invertebrate activities increased the contact between the biofilm and water. We conclude that engineering by invertebrates in natural conditions modifies characteristics of the hyporheic zone and thereby enhances both the porosity of the sediment and the solute transport across the benthic interface. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".