MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2270325406 · doi:10.14288/1.0095773

The effects of lake acidification on zooplankton community structure and phytoplankton-zooplankton interactions : an experimental approach

2010· article· en· W2270325406 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David R. Marmorek

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Acidification Effects and Responses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZooplanktonPhytoplanktonEnvironmental scienceOceanographyCommunity structureEcologyNutrientBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of lake acidification on zooplankton communities and phytoplankton-zooplankton interactions were investigated by means of two field experiments in Eunice Lake, an oligotrophic, low alkalinity lake in the Coastal Range Mountains of British Columbia. Both experiments were carried out in situ using eight polyolefin enclosures, each holding 28,000 liters of lakewater and plankton. From July to October 1979, acidification with H₂SO₄ and enrichment with NH₄NO₃ and H₃PO₄, were applied to enclosures both as separate treatments and in combination. Acidification alone lowered the epilimnetic pH to 5.6, but did not affect zooplankton, phytoplankton, or transparency. Enrichment alone increased chlorophyll a concentrations, the biomass of edible algal cells and zooplankton biomass. When acidification and enrichment were combined, biotic processsing of NH₄NO₃ lowered the pH to 5.4, causing high mortality to the zooplankton community dominant, Daphnia rosea. The decline of Daphnia allowed chlorophyll a concentrations to increase 6-9 fold. It also led to major changes in the species composition, size structure and amplitude of biomass fluctuations of the zooplankton community. Phytoplankton appeared much more affected by acid-induced changes to zooplankton grazing than by direct abiotic effects of acidification. The 1979 experiment suggested that if lakes of pH 5.0 to 5.5 are enriched, the probability of nuisance algal blooms may be increased, particularly if the herbivorous community dominants are both large and acid-sensitive. In May 1980, unenriched enclosures were acidified over a ten day period to pH 5.5, 5.0 or 4.5, and then maintained at constant pH for seven weeks. Though the acid tolerance of D. rosea was very similar in both years' experiments, the copepod Diaptomus tyrrelli was more sensitive to acidification in 1980 than in 1979, due to differences in either life history stage, temperature or food. High rates of acidification increased toxicity near incipient lethal levels in both D. rosea and Bosmina lonqirostris. Acidification to pH 5.5, 5.0 and 4.5 decreased mean zooplankton biomass by 20%, 63% and 74%. However, both chlorophyll a concentrations and rotifer biomass increased with the level of acidification, due to apparent releases from grazing and competition (respectively). Both my 1979 enclosure experiment and whole-lake manipulations performed elsewhere suggested that acidic lakes might show increased fluctuation in zooplankton biomass over circumneutral lakes. Analyses of unpublished zooplankton data from Ontario acidic lakes support this suggestion. In general, the direction of zooplankton community change is determined by the intersection of acidification episodes with the spatial and temporal distributions of acid-sensitive species, and the competitive relationships within the community at the time of acidification. Both species distributions and competitive relationships are sensitive to seasonal changes in temperature and nutrients, to which zooplankton life histories have been finely tuned. Long-term acidification may create "holes" in the temporal organization of zooplankton communities, with no acid-tolerant species available with the appropriate life history and temperature response physiology to fill them.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicOcean Acidification Effects and ResponsesFrench-language works237,207