Climate alters intraspecific variation in copepod effect traits through pond food webs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Essential fatty acids (EFAs) are primarily generated by phytoplankton in aquatic ecosystems, and can limit the growth, development, and reproduction of higher consumers. Among the most critical of the EFAs are highly unsaturated fatty acids (HUFAs), which are only produced by certain groups of phytoplankton. Changing environmental conditions can alter phytoplankton community and fatty acid composition and affect the HUFA content of higher trophic levels. Almost no research has addressed intraspecific variation in HUFAs in zooplankton, nor intraspecific relationships of HUFAs with body size and fecundity. This is despite that intraspecific variation in HUFAs can exceed interspecific variation and that intraspecific trait variation in body size and fecundity is increasingly recognized to have an important role in food web ecology (effect traits). Our study addressed the relative influences of abiotic selection and food web effects associated with climate change on intraspecific differences and interrelationships between HUFA content, body size, and fecundity of freshwater copepods. We applied structural equation modeling and regression analyses to intraspecific variation in a dominant calanoid copepod, Leptodiatomus minutus, among a series of shallow north-temperate ponds. Climate-driven diurnal temperature fluctuations favored the coexistence of diversity of phytoplankton groups with different temperature optima and nutritive quality. This resulted in unexpected positive relationships between temperature, copepod DHA content and body size. Temperature correlated positively with diatom biovolume, and mediated relationships between copepod HUFA content and body size, and between copepod body size and fecundity. The presence of brook trout further accentuated these positive effects in warm ponds, likely through nutrient cycling and stimulation of phytoplankton resources. Climate change may have previously unrecognized positive effects on freshwater copepod DHA content, body size, and fecundity in the small, shallow bodies of inland waters that are commonly found in north-temperate landscapes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".