MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142768254 · doi:10.11646/phytotaxa.127.1.15

Recent changes in abundance and cell size of pelagic diatoms in the North American Great Lakes

2013· article· en· W2142768254 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Euan D. Reavie, Richard P. Barbiero

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytotaxa · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Minnesota DuluthUniversity of MinnesotaU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsDiatomPelagic zonePhytoplanktonAbundance (ecology)EcologyCell sizeBiologyNitzschiaPaleolimnologyTaxonOceanographyNutrientGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Changes in diatom abundance and cell size in Great Lakes phytoplankton collections were examined from two periods, 1996–1999 and 2007–2008. Trends indicate marked shifts in pelagic diatoms, including diatom total biovolume and cell density declines. Concurrent with these changes have been establishments of invasive species, water quality changes and longer stratification periods resulting from climate warming. No consistent change in cell sizes was observed in diatoms between the two periods in the Great Lakes basin as a whole, but lake- and taxon-specific changes were apparent. Cell size declines include centric and pennate diatoms in the spring in Lake Huron and pennate diatoms in the spring in Lake Superior. Increases in cell size occurred for centric diatoms in Lake Erie and pennate diatoms in the summer in lakes Michigan and Ontario. Some of the more dominant taxa exhibited lake-specific shifts. For instance, lightly-silicified diatoms such as Nitzschia increased in length in Lake Huron, possibly as an adaptation to climate warming and/or declining nutrient supplies. Difficulty in explaining the observed changes in cell sizes is acknowledged, but continued study of these trends is critical to understanding impacts on Great Lakes 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytotaxaSame topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207