Environmental predictors of benthic consumers and autotrophic communities along a recovery gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecological theory predicts that biological factors replace abiotic regulation of community structure during recovery from ecosystem stress. We examined relationships between benthic autotroph (epilithic periphyton) and consumer communities, and environmental variables, along a gradient of six recovering acidified lakes to identify the best explanatory variables of community structure. Dissolved organic carbon, pH, and total dissolved phosphorus were important predictors of autotrophic biomass, while total dissolved phosphorus was the only significant factor explaining variation in consumer biomass. Abiotic factors (e.g., dissolved organic carbon, pH) were also significant predictors of autotrophic and consumer community composition. Autotrophic biomass was significantly greater in recovering lakes owing to an increased abundance of attached filamentous green algae. However, consumer biomass did not differ significantly between severely stressed and recovering lakes because of a compensatory shift from numerous small tolerant omnivores to fewer large-bodied sensitive grazers. Lack of a significant relationship between autotrophic and consumer biomass along with stable isotopic evidence of few primary consumers suggested that grazing pressure was weak, especially in the stressed lakes. The persistent importance of abiotic factors to autotrophic and consumer communities suggested that ecosystem recovery remained incomplete in these lakes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".