The contribution of picophytoplankton in marine and freshwater systems of different trophic status and depth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although there are a number of single system and regional studies on the importance of picophytoplankton (PP; 0.2–2 µm), there has been little effort to quantify their importance on a larger scale and to integrate marine and freshwater studies. We developed empirical models from data in the literature to assess the absolute and relative importance of PP in marine and freshwater. The PP biomass (chlorophyll a [Chl a]) increases with trophic status, here represented by the total Chl a, in both marine and freshwater systems. In addition, PP abundance in freshwater, and primary production in marine waters, increases with trophic status. Even so, the relative importance of the PP biomass and primary production declines systematically with increasing trophic status in both marine and freshwater systems. Both the absolute biomass of PP and the relative contribution of PP biomass to the total phytoplankton community biomass are larger in freshwater at any particular value of total Chl a. In eutrophic lakes, which are typically shallow and particularly susceptible to the greatest phytoplankton resuspension and sediment recruitment, the on average small relative contribution of PP biomass appears affected by a relatively high but variable contribution of resuspended microplankton.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".