MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168729499 · doi:10.1093/plankt/fbt013

Picophytoplankton during the ice-free season in five temperate-zone rivers

2013· article· en· W2168729499 on OpenAlexaff
Jacinthe Contant, Frances R. Pick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plankton Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEutrophicationTemperate climatePhytoplanktonAbundance (ecology)Environmental scienceBiomass (ecology)Chlorophyll aPhosphorusTrophic levelEcologyOceanographyTrophic state indexNutrientBiologyChemistryGeologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although picophytoplankton (PP) (0.2–2 µm) are ubiquitous in lakes and oceans, their importance in rivers has rarely been studied. We examined PP assemblages during the ice-free period in five rivers of a temperate region varying in trophic state (9–107 µg/L total phosphorus) and water discharge (1–87 m3/s). In these rivers, PP abundance reached concentrations as high as those observed in lakes and oceans (∼104–105 cells/mL). The highest density of PP (4.9 × 105 cells/mL) was observed in the most eutrophic river when the water temperature (28°C) and total phosphorus (293 µg/L) were highest. For the most part, PP abundance was dominated by non-phycoerythrin-containing cyanobacteria; phycocyanin-rich cells accounted for ∼75% of PP abundance in all the rivers. In multiple regression analyses, water temperature and nitrate concentrations explained about half of the variation in PP abundance across the rivers. Discharge had no effect on PP abundance or biomass, whereas it had a significant negative effect on total algal biomass among the rivers. The PP contribution to total chlorophyll-a averaged 27% (ranging 16–46%) and did not decline with increasing nutrients as found in lakes and oceans. The PP biomass from microscopic enumerations reached a maximum of 9% of total phytoplankton biomass, comparable with that observed in lakes. The results of this study demonstrate the importance of including picophytoplankton when analysing phytoplankton communities in rivers.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plankton ResearchSame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207