Temporal and spatial concordance in community composition of phytoplankton, zooplankton, macroinvertebrate, crayfish, and fish on the Precambrian Shield
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concordance among communities dictates how broadly we can extrapolate results derived from a set of ecosystems. We used Mantel tests to evaluate the degree of concordance in community composition among phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthic macroinvertebrate, crayfish, and fish in eight lakes near Dorset, Ontario, Canada. Spatial concordance across lakes at the decadal scale was stronger (mean Mantel r = 0.51, standard deviation (SD) = 0.20) than both intra-annual agreement (mean Mantel r = 0.38, SD = 0.20) and temporal concordance within a single lake (mean Mantel r = 0.20, SD = 0.15). The degree of temporal concordance was not related to climatic fluctuations, with the exception of increased spatial synchrony in phytoplankton communities in 1997. Strength of overall spatial concordance was most commonly related to variability in chemical attributes of the study lakes. An understanding of the determinants of concordance among taxon groups is germane to the advancement of ecology in general, as well as biodiversity conservation strategies, ecosystem monitoring, and impact diagnosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".