MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144152883 · doi:10.3354/ab00162

Differences in the trophic role of Mysis diluviana in two intermontane lakes

2009· article· en· W2144152883 on OpenAlexaffabout
JD Whall, D. C. Lasenby

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersMinistry of Environment
KeywordsTrophic levelFood webCopepodPredationEcologyBiologyZooplanktonTrophic cascadePopulationFisheryCrustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trophic role of the freshwater shrimp Mysis diluviana was compared between 2 neighbouring lakes in British Columbia to investigate its possible role in the collapse of the Okanagan Lake kokanee salmon Oncorhynchus nerka population.Stable isotopes of nitrogen (δ 15 N) and carbon (δ 13 C) were used to compare the trophic relationships of mysids within the pelagic food web and between lakes.Mid-summer δ 15 N signatures suggested that adult mysids in Okanagan Lake were acting more as primary consumers, and Kalamalka Lake mysids were acting as secondary consumers.M. diluviana's predatory capacity was also assessed through in situ clearance rate feeding experiments and examination of gut contents.M. diluviana <1 yr old in Okanagan Lake were capable of clearing a greater volume of prey, but there was no difference between lakes for M. diluviana >1 yr old.Gut contents confirmed M. diluviana in both lakes were consuming copepod and cladoceran prey.All 3 techniques demonstrated ontogenetic diet shifts, with larger mysids obtaining more energy from zooplankton prey.Although mysids in feeding experiments actively consumed the same zooplankton prey as kokanee, δ 15 N and δ 13 C ratios suggest that mysids in Okanagan Lake were not feeding at the same trophic level as kokanee, which indicates that there may have been less competition for food sources than previously thought.These differences in results suggest that predatory capacity, as indicated by in situ feeding experiments or gut content analysis, should not be used in isolation to establish trophic roles for omnivorous animals.

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)0.000
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 score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic BiologySame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207