MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2113312348 · doi:10.1139/f00-189

Zooplankton production in Lake Ontario: a multistrata approach

2000· article· en· W2113312348 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Michelle M. Kuns, W. Gary Sprules

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypolimnionEpilimnionWater columnPlanktonThermoclineEnvironmental scienceZooplanktonStratification (seeds)Hydrology (agriculture)OceanographyGeologyEutrophicationEcologyBiologyNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present evidence that estimates of annual zooplankton production in Lake Ontario based on stratified plankton net tows are preferable to those based on single, integrated tows through the whole water column. Samples were collected roughly every 2 weeks during 1993 and 1994 at a deep midlake station and at a shallower nearshore station. Stratified net tows were taken through each of the epilimnion, metalimnion, and hypolimnion and the mean temperatures of these strata used in production calculations. Integrated net tows were taken through the whole water column and the mean temperature of the column used in production calculations. Production estimates based on stratified samples were consistently higher (up to 310%) than those based on integrated samples. We show that higher stratified estimates are partly due to higher plankton net filtering efficiency over the shorter stratified hauls and partly due to the lower mean temperatures used in integrated hauls. Our analyses provide a basis for approximating the error in integrated production estimates caused by temperature stratification, water column depth, and plankton net efficiency.

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)0.001
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 score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations27
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→