Epiphytic macroinvertebrate communities on Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and native milfoils Myriophyllum sibericum and Myriophyllum alterniflorum in eastern North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aquatic macrophytes play an important role in the survival and proliferation of invertebrates in freshwater ecosystems. Epiphytic invertebrate communities may be altered through the replacement of native macrophytes by exotic macrophytes, even when the macrophytes are close relatives and have similar morphology. We sampled an invasive exotic macrophyte, Eurasian watermilfoil ( Myriophyllum spicatum ), and native milfoils Myriophyllum sibericum and Myriophyllum alterniflorum in four bodies of water in southern Quebec and upstate New York during the summer of 2005. Within each waterbody, we compared the abundance, diversity, and community composition of epiphytic macroinvertebrates on exotic and native Myriophyllum. In general, both M. sibericum and M. alterniflorum had higher invertebrate diversity and higher invertebrate biomass and supported more gastropods than the exotic M. spicatum. In late summer, invertebrate density tended to be higher on M. sibericum than on M. spicatum, but lower on M. alterniflorum than on M. spicatum. Our results demonstrate that M. spicatum supports macroinvertebrate communities that may differ from those on structurally similar native macrophytes, although these differences vary across sites and sampling dates. Thus, the replacement of native milfoils by M. spicatum may have indirect effects on aquatic food webs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".