MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163153419 · doi:10.1139/f01-009

Changes in the zooplankton community of the British Columbia continental margin, 1985-1999, and their covariation with oceanographic conditions

2001· article· en· W2163153419 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
David L. Mackas, Richard E. Thomson, Moira Galbraith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZooplanktonCopepodSubarctic climateOceanographyEcologyBiomass (ecology)Abundance (ecology)Continental shelfEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyGeologyCrustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 15-year zooplankton time series collected off southern Vancouver Island (48–49°N) shows large interannual anomalies of biomass for most major zooplankton species. Variations within groups of ecologically similar species have been more extreme (often 10-fold or greater) than the variation in total biomass (four- to six-fold). For both total biomass and species groups, the zooplankton anomalies develop and persist over time spans of several years and are correlated across a large spatial scale (>100 km longshore). One dominant mode of recent zooplankton variation was a 1990–1998 cumulative shift to a more "southerly" copepod and chaetognath fauna: order-of-magnitude declines in several species endemic to the Northeast Pacific continental shelf and order-of-magnitude increases of species endemic to the California Current (35–45°N). This trend abruptly reversed in 1999. A second major mode of zooplankton variability consisted of roughly mirror-image fluctuations in the abundance of euphausiids versus subarctic oceanic copepods. Zooplankton anomalies were correlated with year-to-year changes in several physical environmental indices. The patterns of covariance suggest that zooplankton community composition responds strongly to ocean climate fluctuations and in particular to changing current patterns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations237
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207