Effects of ultraviolet‐B radiation and vertical mixing on nitrogen uptake by a natural planktonic community shifting from nitrate to silicic acid deficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the combined effects of mixing regimes and ultraviolet‐B radiation (UVBR: 280–320 nm) on the uptake of nitrate, ammonium, and urea by an estuarine phytoplankton community during a 10‐d mesocosm experiment in July 1997. The experiment was conducted in eight mesocosms (1,500 liters each) subjected to varying conditions of UVBR and mixing: (1) natural UVBR and fast mixing, (2) enhanced UVBR and fast mixing, (3) natural UVBR and slow mixing, and (4) enhanced UVBR and slow mixing. The study was carried out during a typical midsummer period of low nutrient concentrations. Throughout the experiment, the phytoplankton community was dominated by a mixed community composed mainly of centric diatoms, cyanobacteria, and prymnesiophytes, with larger algal cells (>5 µm) representing >70% of the total chlorophyll a biomass. The phytoplankton nutrient status changed over the experiment. Algal cells were nitrate‐deficient until the occurrence of a nitrification event on day 7, and then became silicic acid‐deficient. Mesocosms with different mixing rates showed significant differences in ambient nutrient concentrations, nitrogen uptake rates, and phytoplankton species composition. In general, no significant difference was detected between the N transport rates from samples incubated close to the surface and close to the bottom of the mesocosms, and no difference was detected between the UVBR treatments on all the other studied biological and chemical variables measured during the experiment. It is only under the slow mixing regime that the enhanced UVBR treatments significantly depress both the transport and the chlorophyll a—specific transport rates of dissolved organic nitrogen (urea). The UVBR effects observed only in the slow mixing regime could be a consequence of an inherent difference in the uptake capacity of the different communities under the two mixing regimes. Both nutrient conditions and mixing regime influenced the natural phytoplankton physiology and composition toward a community more sensitive to UVBR enhancement under a slower mixing regime.
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".