Variability in the vertical distribution and advective transport of eight mesozooplankton taxa in spring in Rivers Inlet, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zooplankton vertical distribution data and velocity estimates from a hydrodynamic model were employed to determine zooplankton daily exchange during four cruises conducted from March to June 2010 in Rivers Inlet, a fjord in central British Columbia, Canada. Zooplankton transport rates varied temporally, being fastest in March when water velocities were highest. The active vertical movement of the zooplankton interacted with the vertically sheared flow field to influence zooplankton advection. Surface dwelling plankton such as Acartia longiremis and larvaceans experienced the highest advection losses of −0.4 and −0.5 day−1, respectively. In contrast, maximum advection losses of Paraeuchaeta elongata, a deeper dwelling copepod, were an order of magnitude lower, at 0.04 day−1. Transport rates varied by stage, extent of diel vertical migration and timing of ontogenetic migration. Advection rates were lower than literature-derived egg production rates, but comparable to literature-derived mortality rates. We suggest that advection may be a significant driver of population dynamics in years with similar rates of population growth. We also stress the importance of determining advection rates to obtain accurate estimates of vital rates.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".