The success of the cyanobacterium Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii in freshwaters is enhanced by the combined effects of light intensity and temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toxic cyanobacterial blooms in freshwaters are thought to be a consequence of the combined effects of anthropogenic eutrophication and climate change. It is expected that climate change will affect water mixing regimes that alter the water transparency and ultimately the light environment for phytoplankton. Blooms of the potentially toxic cyanobacterium Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii are expanding from tropical towards temperate regions. Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain this expansion, including an increase in water temperature due to climate change and the high phenotypic plasticity of the species that allows it to exploit different light environments. We performed an analysis based on eight lakes in tropical, subtropical and temperate regions to examine the distribution and abundance of C. raciborskii in relation to water temperature and transparency. We then conducted a series of short-term factorial experiments that combined three temperatures and two light intensity levels using C. raciborskii cultures alone and in interaction with another cyanobacterium to identify its growth capacity. Our results from the field, in contrast to predictions, showed no differences in dominance (>40% to the total biovolume) of C. raciborskii between climate regions. C. raciborskii was able to dominate the phytoplankton in a wide range of light environments (euphotic zone = 1.5 to 5 m, euphotic zone/mixing zone ratio <0.5 to >1.5). Moreover, C. raciborskii was capable of dominating the phytoplankton at low temperatures (<15°C). Our experimental results showed that C. raciborskii growing in interaction was enhanced by the increase of the temperature and light intensity. C. raciborskii growth in high light intensities and at a wide range of temperatures, suggests that any advantage that this species may derive from climate change that favors its dominance in the phytoplankton is likely due to changes in the light environment rather than changes in temperature. Predictive models that consider only temperature as a drive factor can therefore fail in predicting the expansion of this potentially toxic cyanobacterium.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".