MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151149095 · doi:10.1139/f10-062

Are seasonal lakes as productive as permanent lakes? A case study from Ireland

2010· article· en· W2151149095 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Helder Cunha Pereira, Norman Allott, Catherine Coxon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutrientChlorophyll aSeasonalityEnvironmental sciencePhosphorusChlorophyllBiomass (ecology)EcologyBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper compares, for the first time, nutrient levels and chlorophyll a measured in a set of seasonal lakes with those reported for permanent lakes in the literature. Twenty-two turloughs (karstic seasonal lakes) in western Ireland were sampled monthly from the onset of flooding (October) until they dried out (6 to 9 months). The turloughs showed similar levels of nutrients and chlorophyll a to those reported for Irish and international lakes. Chlorophyll a peaked between November and February in the majority of turloughs, sometimes with values higher than those measured in mesotrophic lakes in summer. A significant log-linear regression was found between total phosphorus and chlorophyll a, which suggests P limitation of algal biomass in the majority of the turloughs. The regression characteristics were not significantly different than those described in similar studies of permanent lakes. Patterns in seasonal variation of nutrients are also presented, their underlying causes being discussed in relation to their transport within catchments. Our results show that despite being predominantly winter phenomena, turloughs can be as productive as permanent 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207