MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109807054 · doi:10.1093/plankt/fbh051

A statistical method for the robust detection of interannual changes in plankton abundance: analysis of monitoring data from the Bay of Fundy, Canada

2004· article· en· W2109807054 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael K. Dowd

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plankton Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZooplanktonAbundance (ecology)PlanktonBayEnvironmental scienceAnnual cycleOceanographyEcologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plankton abundance time series were analysed with an emphasis on the detection of interannual variability. These data covered the period 1988–1999 and were collected in the western Bay of Fundy, Canada as part of an ongoing regional monitoring program. The abundance observations considered here were obtained from water samples at a single station (44°59.57′N, 66°44.36′W) and at four depths (0, 10, 25 and 50 m). The analysis was based on log-transformed abundance of the taxonomic groups diatoms, dinoflagellates and zooplankton. The time-varying abundance level and its error variance were estimated using a statistical time series method designed for the identification of interannual variability using irregularly sampled and noisy data. To this end, plankton abundance measurements were fitted to a cyclic model using a Kalman filter and associated fixed interval smoother. Maximum likelihood procedures were used to determine all unknown system parameters. The model provided a good fit to these data and allowed identification of year to year changes in the timing and magnitude of the annual abundance cycle. The greatest interannual variability was found in the dinoflagellates and diatoms, with only slight changes in the zooplankton. It was shown that while the annual cycle is readily determined from the observations, interannual variations were near the detection limit. For much of the study period, plankton abundance was not statistically distinguishable from a fixed and repeating mean annual cycle at the 90% confidence level. However, during many time periods dinoflagellates and diatoms, and to a lesser extent zooplankton, exhibited significant interannual variations in abundance. A retrospective analysis of the monitoring program suggested that to achieve robust detection of interannual abundance changes, the variability associated with the water sample based point measurements must be decreased, either through replication, more frequent sampling, or alternative sampling methodologies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plankton ResearchSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207