MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107953100 · doi:10.1139/f05-146

Modelling the invasion risk of diapausing organisms transported in ballast sediments

2005· article· en· W2107953100 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marjorie J. Wonham, Sarah A. Bailey, Hugh J. MacIsaac, Mark A. Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine Ecology and Invasive Species
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBallastEnvironmental scienceDiapauseBiologySedimentEcologyFisheryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biological invasions via ship ballast are a major driver of biodiversity change in aquatic systems. In the Laurentian Great Lakes basin, unique shipping operations pose a particular invasion risk. The majority (>90%) of incoming vessels are not fully loaded with ballast water but carry ballast sediments and residual water. Ballast sediments contain viable diapause organisms that could hatch and be released during routine ballast operations. To assess invasion risk and control of this pathway, we constructed and parameterized a dynamic hatching model for three representative groups of freshwater organisms that undergo diapause: rotifers, cladocerans, and copepods. Numerical model simulations show that ballast sediment is a plausible invasion pathway for all three groups. The model also illustrates that postuptake ballast treatment to remove or kill potential invaders should be applied as late as possible prior to deballasting to minimize the number of live organisms released. Simulations show that the ability of taxa to reproduce parthenogenetically inside a ballast tank greatly influences quantitative predictions of both risk and control.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.171

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine Ecology and Invasive SpeciesFrench-language works237,207