MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The physics of the warming of Lake Tanganyika by climate change

2009· article· en· W2162501395 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Piet Verburg, Robert E. Hecky

Bibliographic record

VenueLimnology and Oceanography · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGlobal warmingEnvironmental scienceWater columnStratification (seeds)Climate changeOceanographyBottom waterProductivityClimatologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate warming over the 20th century has increased the density stratification and stability of Lake Tanganyika, a deep rift valley lake. Here we examine the physical processes involved in and affected by the warming of the lake, and we discuss effects on lake productivity. The rate of net heat absorption by Lake Tanganyika has been 0.4 W m −2 since 1913, twice the rate in the global ocean, indicating stronger climate forcing in the East African region. Lakes warm through increased incoming long‐wave radiation. While lakes in general will increase heat outputs in a warming climate, heat outputs will increase more slowly in deeper lakes than in shallower lakes. Temperatures have increased by 0.2°C at 1000 m in depth, in part because of reduced cool marginal inflows, while water surface temperatures have increased by about 1.3°C. This differential heating over depth has increased the density gradient through the water column, reducing the potential for vertical mixing and thereby limiting nutrient fluxes to the phototrophic zone. An increase in transparency, indicating a reduction in productivity as a result of the reduced vertical mixing, occurred both in Lake Tanganyika and in Lake Malawi, a similar deep tropical lake in which warming has also been documented.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations142
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLimnology and OceanographySame topicAquatic Ecosystems and BiodiversityFrench-language works237,207