MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125472448 · doi:10.1139/f05-181

Predictive models of benthic invertebrate methylmercury in Ontario and Quebec lakes

2005· article· en· W2125472448 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Michael D. Rennie, Nicholas C. Collins, Craig F. Purchase, Angelo Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsBenthic zoneInvertebrateMethylmercuryZooplanktonPelagic zoneEnvironmental scienceEcologyGelatinous zooplanktonDissolved organic carbonBenthosEnvironmental chemistryBiologyBioaccumulationChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multivariate analyses on benthic invertebrate methylmercury concentrations ([MeHg]) and water chemistry from 12 Quebec water bodies were used to guide the construction of simple, predictive models of benthic invertebrate [MeHg] in 23 lakes in Ontario and Quebec. Separate predictive models for collector–shredder and predatory benthic invertebrates were constructed using multiple regression and were assessed for their predictive utility by cross-validation. Predatory benthic invertebrate [MeHg] was negatively related to pH and positively related to dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentration (cross-validation r2 = 0.31). Collector–shredder [MeHg] was positively related to [DOC] only (cross-validation r2 = 0.13). Predictive utility of our models is similar to or surpasses that observed in previously published zooplankton MeHg models tested against independently collected data. Significant environmental variables and their contribution to the overall explanatory power of benthic invertebrate MeHg models are similar to those found in zooplankton models, suggesting that in both pelagic and benthic food webs, pH and DOC are important indicators of MeHg bioavailability. Although seasonal patterns in invertebrate [MeHg] were examined, none was detected. These models represent an effective means of identifying water bodies of interest for researchers and for reconstructing past benthic invertebrate [MeHg] patterns using archived water chemistry data.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations33
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207