Ontogenetic differences in isotopic signatures and crop contents of Chaoborus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intra-specific changes in trophic interactions due to ontogenetic transformations in macro-invertebrates can add to complexity of freshwater food webs. The objectives of this study are therefore to examine isotopic signatures and crop contents of different Chaoborus species and life stages, and to determine whether ontogenetic changes in diet are reflected in their isotopic signatures. Different Chaoborus species and life stages were collected from 15 Precambrian Shield lakes for stable isotope and crop contents analyses. In general, early instar Chaoborus δ13C and δ13CLC (lipid corrected δ13C) signatures were enriched in 13C, while their δ15NDC (Daphnia corrected δ15N) signatures were lower compared to those of late instars and pupae. Larval Chaoborus size was significantly related to their δ13C, δ13CLC&DC (lipid and Daphnia corrected δ13C), and δ15NDC isotopic signatures. Chaoborus crop contents varied among species and larval instars. Generally, rotifers were numerically predominant in crops, with declining abundance in late instars. Larger quantities of copepods, nauplii and cladocerans were found in crops of late instars compared with early instars. Overall, early instars consumed more rotifers and phytoplankton and had lower δ15NDC, whereas late instars consumed comparatively larger quantities of copepods, nauplii, cladocerans and early instars, and had higher δ15NDC. Together, our results show that there are differences among larval Chaoborus life stages. Hence, different instars of these important aquatic predators cannot be grouped together, but should be separated by species and life stage when examining trophic interactions in freshwater food webs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".