Summer depth selection in crustacean zooplankton in nutrient‐poor boreal lakes is affected by recent residential development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary 1. Strong vertical gradients in light, water temperature, oxygen, algal concentration and predator encounters during summer in stratified lakes may influence patterns of depth selection in crustacean zooplankton, especially Daphnia species. 2. To test how crustacean depth selection varies among lakes along a gradient of catchment disturbance by recent residential development and land use change, we calculated the weighted mean depth distribution of the biomass of crustaceans by day and night in eight nutrient‐poor boreal lakes. 3. Generally, the greatest biomass of crustaceans was located at the metalimnion or at the lower boundary of the euphotic zone during thermal stratification in July. The crustacean zooplankton avoided warm surface layers and tended to stay in colder deep waters by both day and night. They also remained at greater depths in lakes with a more extensive euphotic zone. 4. There was some evidence of upward nocturnal migrations of large Daphnia and copepods in some lakes, and one case of downward migration in a lake inhabited by chaoborid larvae. 5. Multivariate regression trees (MRT) were used to cluster crustaceans and Daphnia species in homogeneous groups based on lake natural and disturbance factors. For crustaceans, the depth of the euphotic zone, the sampling depth (epilimnion, metalimnion and hypolimnion), time (day or night) of sampling and the biomass of chlorophyll a were the main driving factors. For Daphnia species, the drainage area, the sampling depth, the cleared land surface area within the catchment and the concentration of total dissolved phosphorus were the main factors.
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 | 0.000 | 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".