MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Migration supports uneven consumer control in a sewage‐enriched river food web

2004· article· en· W2162313762 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adrian M.H. deBruyn, Kevin S. McCann, Joseph B. Rasmussen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersPurdue Institute for Integrative Neuroscience, Purdue University
KeywordsFood webTrophic levelPredationEcologyBenthic zoneBiologyBiomass (ecology)Primary producersApex predatorEnvironmental scienceNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We studied the response of the St Lawrence River food web to enrichment by primary‐treated sewage from the city of Montreal, Canada. Despite the richness and complexity of this food web, the openness of the system and the limited production possible in this temperate river's short growing season, we found that biomass densities of consumers responded to enrichment according to the qualitative predictions of a simple bioenergetic model. All consumer trophic levels responded to sewage enrichment, but not all members of each trophic level: top piscivores seemed to control small, benthivorous fish but were unable to control larger fish, so the intermediate consumer level became dominated by Catastomidae (suckers). Consequently, the epiphytic prey of small fish were free to respond to sewage enrichment, but the benthic prey of suckers were not. The important elements of complexity seemed to be the factors that determine the realized pattern of feeding linkages: heterogeneity in prey vulnerability (predator–prey size ratios) and predator efficiency (vegetation cover for ambush predators, inaccessibility of epiphytic prey to bottom‐feeding suckers). Because of the openness of the system, the community was able to respond to enrichment by a combination of demographic (production) and behavioural (migration) mechanisms. We argue that the food web model described an energetically favourable state, and that migration provided a ‘shortcut’ for the system to approach this state within a short growing season.

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)0.001
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 score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations11
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207