MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402461077 · doi:10.1139/f01-002

Recent declines in benthic macroinvertebrate densities in Lake Ontario

2001· article· en· W2402461077 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Stephen J. Lozano, Jill V. Scharold, Thomas F. Nalepa

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBoettcher FoundationU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsBenthic zoneDreissenaInvertebrateEcologyAmphipodaBenthosSedimentPopulation densityBiologyEnvironmental sciencePopulationMolluscaCrustaceanBivalvia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surveys of benthic macroinvertebrates conducted in Lake Ontario during 1994 and 1997 revealed recent declines in populations of three major taxonomic groups: Oligochaeta, Sphaeriidae, and Diporeia spp. (Amphipoda), with the most drastic reductions occurring in the latter. Results from sediment measurements were used to classify deepwater sediments into three habitat zones. Densities of all three taxa declined in the shallowest (12–88 m) of the sediment zones between 1994 and 1997; the greatest changes in density were observed for Diporeia, which declined from 3011 to 145 individuals·m –2 , and for total benthic macroinvertebrates, which declined from 5831 to 1376 individuals· m –2 . Mean densities of Dreissena spp. in 1997 were highest in the shallowest zone, and the areas of greatest densities corresponded to areas of largest reductions in Diporeia populations. We believe that dreissenids are competing with Diporeia by intercepting the supply of fresh algae essential for Diporeia survival. A decline in macroinvertebrate densities, especially populations of an important food item such as Diporeia, in Lake Ontario sediments at depths of 12–88 m may have a detrimental impact on the benthic food web.

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)0.001
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 score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.197 · 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.

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

Citations106
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207