You are not always what we think you eat: selective assimilation across multiple whole‐stream isotopic tracer studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyses of 21 15 N stable isotope tracer experiments, designed to examine food web dynamics in streams around the world, indicated that the isotopic composition of food resources assimilated by primary consumers (mostly invertebrates) poorly reflected the presumed food sources. Modeling indicated that consumers assimilated only 33–50% of the N available in sampled food sources such as decomposing leaves, epilithon, and fine particulate detritus over feeding periods of weeks or more. Thus, common methods of sampling food sources consumed by animals in streams do not sufficiently reflect the pool of N they assimilate. Isotope tracer studies, combined with modeling and food separation techniques, can improve estimation of N pools in food sources that are assimilated by consumers. Food web studies that use putative food samples composed of actively cycling (more readily assimilable) and refractory (less assimilable) N fractions may draw erroneous conclusions about diets, N turnover, and trophic linkages of consumers. By extension, food web studies using stoichiometric or natural abundance approaches that rely on an accurate description of food‐source composition could result in errors when an actively cycling pool that is only a fraction of the N pool in sampled food resources is not accounted for.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".