Implications of UV radiation for the food web structure and consequences on the carbon flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Given the anticipated decreasing concentrations of stratospheric ozone, the concern regarding the effects of UV radiation (UVR) in the environment is very topical. The preceding chapters in this book provide a state-of-the-art review of UVR effects in the marine environment (see Figure 11.1). This last chapter synthesises briefly the potential UV-induced responses at community and ecosystem levels and gives an insight on how the global changes can interact with the direct impacts of UVR. The increase of anthropogenic chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) is responsible for the destruction of ozone in the upper atmosphere. This decrease in the ozone layer causes in an increase of UV-B radiation in the wavelength range 280 to 320 nm (Chapter 1). The past decade has been witness to a concentrated effort from the international scientific community tomeasure the increase of UVR and to understand its effects on different ecosystems. These efforts were supported by signatories to international agreements, such as the Montreal Protocol, to control and eliminate the production and emission of ozone-depleting substances. However, each spring, an ‘ozone hole’ larger than the size of Canada appears over the Antarctic region (Smith et al. , 1992). In the Arctic and into the north temperate zone, the ozone layer diminished by more than 45% during the 1997/8 winter, the most important decrease in 35 years (Wardle et al. , 1997). Notable ozone depletion has now been observed in both polar regions, as ozone loss rates in the Arctic region in recent years have reached values comparable to those recorded over the Antarctic (Rex et al. , 1997, and references therein).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".