MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175187034 · doi:10.1579/0044-7447-32.3.208

Littoral Microcrustacean (Cladocera and Copepoda) Indicators of Acidification in Canadian Shield Lakes

2003· article· en· W2175187034 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAMBIO · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsCanadiana.org
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLittoral zoneCladoceraFaunaSpecies richnessZooplanktonEcologyCopepodInvertebrateLimnologyTaxonHydrobiologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiologyCrustaceanAquatic environment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We identify littoral microcrustacean indicators of acidification in 2 surveys of Canadian Shield lakes conducted 10 years apart. We found a total of 90 cladoceran and copepod species with richness increasing severalfold from acidic to nonacidic lakes. The fauna of the nonacidic lakes differed between the surveys. The 1987 survey employed activity traps, and caught more littoral taxa than the more recent, net-haul-based survey. Similar faunas were identified in the acidified lakes in both surveys, and several good indicator species were identified. For example, Acanthocycops vernalis was restricted to lakes with pH < 6. Sinobosmina sp. was very common but only in lakes with pH > 4.8. Tropocyclops extensus, Mesocyclops edax, and Sida crystallina were commonly found but only at pH > 5, and Chydorus faviformis only at pH > 5.9. These indicators showed promise in gauging the early stages of recovery from acidification in 3 lakes that were included in both surveys.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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