Patterns in freshwater diatom taxonomic distinctness along an eutrophication gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary 1. A variety of species richness measures have been used to assess the effects of environmental degradation on biodiversity. Such measures can be highly influenced by sample size, sampling effort, habitat type or complexity, however, and typically do not show monotonic responses to human impact. In addition to being independent of the degree of sampling effort involved in data acquisition, effective measures of biodiversity should reflect the degree of taxonomical relatedness among species within ecological assemblages and provide a basis for understanding observed diversity for a particular habitat type. Taxonomic diversity or distinctness indices emphasize the average taxonomic relatedness (i.e. degree of taxonomical closeness) between species in a community. 2. Eutrophication of freshwater ecosystems, mainly due to the increased availability of nutrients, notably phosphorus, has become a major environmental problem. Two measures of taxonomic distinctness (Average Taxonomic Distinctness and Variation in Taxonomic Distinctness) were applied to surface sediment diatoms from 45 lakes across the island of Ireland to examine whether taxonomic distinctness and nutrient enrichment were significantly related at a regional scale. The lakes span a range of concentrations of epilimnic total phosphorus (TP) and were grouped into six different types, based on depth and alkalinity levels, and three different categories according to trophic state (ultra‐oligotrophic and oligotrophic; mesotrophic; and eutrophic and hyper‐eutrophic). 3. The taxonomic distinctness measures revealed significant differences among lakes in the three different classes of trophic state, with nutrient‐rich lakes generally more taxonomically diverse than nutrient‐poor lakes. This implies that enrichment of oligotrophic lakes does not necessarily lead to a reduction in taxonomic diversity, at least as expressed by the indices used here. Furthermore, taxonomic distinctness was highly variable across the six different lake types regardless of nutrient level. 4. Results indicate that habitat availability and physical structure within the study lakes also exert a strong influence on the pattern of taxonomic diversity. Overall the results highlight problems with the use of taxonomic diversity measures for detecting impacts of freshwater eutrophication based on diatom assemblages.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.011 | 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".