Influence of tubificid worms on nutrient fluxes across water-sediment interface in fish farm settling ponds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of tubificid worms on nutrient translocation from water to fish farm sediments accumulating in settling ponds was addressed under laboratory conditions. Small microcosms of 0.5 L were filled up with 35 g of sludge from a fish farm settling pond and 0.15 L of filtered settling pond water. The experimental set up consisted of one control line (no worms added), a second experimental line with 1 mg of tubificid worms·g-1 fresh sediment (550 individuals·m-2) and a third experimental line with 40 mg of tubificid worms·g-1 fresh sediment (22 000 individuals·m-2). Nutrients translocation was determined by monitoring overlaying water concentration of ammonia, nitrate and phosphate for ten days. Results showed that abundances of 550 individuals·m-2 had no significant influence on the fluxes of nutrients here considered. However, the influence of higher abundances of tubificids (22 000 individuals·m-2) was of significant extent on the translocation of nitrate and phosphate. Accordingly, bioturbation of tubificids caused 55% lower nitrate uptake by the sediment when compared to control conditions. Phosphorus released by the sediments of the control condition was ca. 90% higher than that recorded under abundances of tubificids (22 000 individuals·m-2). Results obtained allowed us to estimate that fish farm settling ponds highly colonized by tubificid worms (22 000 individuals·m-2) may contribute to decrease phosphorus discharge (in terms of soluble phosphorus) in ca. 5 g of P·ton-1 of fish produced.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".