MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122831784 · doi:10.1139/f06-077

Short-term responses to watershed logging on biomass mercury and methylmercury accumulation by periphyton in boreal lakes

2006· article· en· W2122831784 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mélanie Desrosiers, Dolors Planas, Alfonso Mucci

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeriphytonWatershedEnvironmental scienceMethylmercuryLoggingHydrology (agriculture)Mercury (programming language)Surface runoffNutrientBorealBiomass (ecology)EcologyGeologyBioaccumulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the boreal forest, watershed logging may increase runoff, as well as chemical loading, including nutrient, dissolved organic carbon, and mercury, to lakes. Because they are exposed directly to nutrients and contaminants exported from the watershed, littoral communities such as periphyton may respond quickly to watershed disturbances. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the response of periphyton to watershed logging using a BACI (before–after control–impact) statistical approach and to develop a predictive tool to facilitate the elaboration of practical logging policies aimed at reducing Hg loading to lakes. In this study, we compare the periphyton biomass in 18 boreal Canadian Shield lakes, as well as their total mercury and methylmercury levels. During the ice-free season from 2000 to 2002, eight of these lakes were monitored before and after logging, with the other 10 lakes serving as controls. The BACI statistical analyses reveal a significant impact of logging on periphyton biomass (decrease; 0.6- to 1.5-fold) and methylmercury accumulation (increase; 2- to 9.6-fold). This study demonstrates that periphyton responds quickly to disturbances of the watershed. Our results suggest that the periphyton and watershed characteristics could serve as good management tools and that logging should be limited in watersheds with a mean slope below 7.0%.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations39
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207