Experimental whole‐lake increase of dissolved organic carbon concentration produces unexpected increase in crustacean zooplankton density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The observed pattern of lake browning, or increased terrestrial dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentration, across the northern hemisphere has amplified the importance of understanding how consumer productivity varies with DOC concentration. Results from comparative studies suggest these increased DOC concentrations may reduce crustacean zooplankton productivity due to reductions in resource quality and volume of suitable habitat. Although these spatial comparisons provide an expectation for the response of zooplankton productivity as DOC concentration increases, we still have an incomplete understanding of how zooplankton respond to temporal increases in DOC concentration within a single system. As such, we used a whole-lake manipulation, in which DOC concentration was increased from 8 to 11 mg L(-1) in one basin of a manipulated lake, to test the hypothesis that crustacean zooplankton production should subsequently decrease. In contrast to the spatially derived expectation of sharp DOC-mediated decline, we observed a small increase in zooplankton densities in response to our experimental increase in DOC concentration of the treatment basin. This was due to significant increases in gross primary production and resource quality (lower seston carbon-to-phosphorus ratio; C:P). These results demonstrate that temporal changes in lake characteristics due to increased DOC may impact zooplankton in ways that differ from those observed in spatial surveys. We also identified significant interannual variability across our study region, which highlights potential difficulty in detecting temporal responses of organism abundances to gradual environmental change (e.g., browning).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".