MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154499288 · doi:10.1016/j.icesjms.2004.03.010

Radiotracer determination of the diet of calanoid copepod nauplii and copepodites in a temperate estuary

2004· article· en· W2154499288 on OpenAlexafffund
Kerri Finlay, John C. Roff

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsAcadia UniversityUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCopepodHeterotrophEstuaryAutotrophBiologyTemperate climatePredationEcologyCalanoidaZooplanktonCrustaceanZoologyBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Many studies have focused on the consumption of specific prey items and clearance rates on natural food particles by copepod adults and copepodites, but few have addressed the feeding habits of the youngest stages, the nauplii. Because of the difference in size and shape between copepod developmental stages, corresponding differences in diet would be expected. This subject was addressed using a modification of a new method offering radiolabelled natural food particles (with 3H for heterotrophs and 14C for autotrophs) to nauplii and copepodites of the copepods in a temperate estuary. By measuring the uptake of the radiolabel by the copepods it was possible to determine clearance rates on different sizes and types of food particles. All copepods began feeding on food sources >2 μm in size, and feeding on heterotrophs by all species and stages was considerably lower than feeding on autotrophs. Overall, it appears that copepod nauplii have a comparable diet to the later stages in terms of food type and size and therefore it is unlikely that nauplii are a more efficient link between the microbial foodweb and the classical foodweb, at least in temperate estuarine waters.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations21
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicMarine Biology and Ecology ResearchFrench-language works237,207