MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110470714 · doi:10.1139/f03-062

Climate change: the potential for latitudinal effects on algal biomass in aquatic ecosystems

2003· article· en· W2110470714 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kyla M. Flanagan, Edward McCauley, Frederick J. Wrona, Terry D. Prowse

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)NutrientLatitudeTemperate climateProductivityArcticEcosystemEcologyClimate changeAquatic ecosystemAbiotic componentBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arctic aquatic systems are considered to be highly susceptible to climate change. Both increases in temperature and nutrient input would be anticipated to alter primary production within these lakes. Consequently, understanding the current relationship between nutrients and productivity is crucial for predicting the effects of climate change. In this paper, we synthesize published data on algal biomass, total phosphorus, total nitrogen, maximum depth, altitude, longitude, and latitude to determine whether average algal biomass differs for temperate and arctic lakes. A total of 57 sources were used, resulting in data for 433 lake-years, ranging in latitudes from 41 to 79°N. Average algal biomass observed during the ice-free season increased significantly with phosphorous levels, but the latitude of the system had a significant negative impact on algal biomass. We briefly outline two major hypotheses, based on existing empirical evidence, for the lower algal yield found in higher latitude systems. The first hypothesis discusses bottom-up control and the influence of abiotic factors on algal biomass. The second hypothesis relates to food chain composition and top-down influences. The latitudinal effect on algal yield suggests that arctic lakes could dramatically increase in productivity if these systems experience increases in temperature and nutrient concentrations as predicted by climate change models.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 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

Citations74
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207