Post-spring bloom community structure of pelagic copepods in the Disko Bay, Western Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community structure of pelagic copepods was investigated in the upper 200 m in the Disko Bay, Western Greenland, during the post-spring bloom period in June, 2001. This was the first study of the copepod community in West Greenland coastal waters sampled using smaller mesh sizes (50 μm as opposed to 200 μm). The mesozooplankton was dominated by copepods who constituted 82% of the total abundance and 95% of the total mesozooplankton biomass (>50 μm). Nauplii of Calanus, Pseudocalanus and Oithona dominated by number and the copepodites and adults were dominated by Oithona spp., Oncaea sp., Pseudocalanus sp., harpacticoids, Calanus finmarchicus,C. glacialis, and C. hyperboreus. Multivariate tests showed that the species/stage abundance composition of copepods changed significantly with depth. With one exception, all depth intervals showed unique significantly different compositions. Accordingly, the copepod community structure was influenced primarily by depth rather than by chlorophyll a concentration. Factors other than herbivorous grazing, such as omnivory, predator avoidance or association to marine snow aggregates of specific species, may have influenced the depth distribution of the total copepod community in the Disko Bay. Nevertheless, subsequent Pearson product moment correlations showed positive significant correlations between the vertical distribution of the three Calanus spp. and Pseudocalanus spp. and chlorophyll a concentrations, which points towards these species as prime components in the classic diatom–copepod food chain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".