The impact of nutrients and submersed macrophytes on invertebrates in a prairie wetland, Delta Marsh, Manitoba.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shallow freshwater systems often exhibit two alternative stable states. The clear-water stable state is dominated by macrophytes, and the turbid stable state is dominated by phytoplankton, with fewer macrophytes. Two factors that may influence a shift in stable state are nutrient loading, and presence of macrophytes. Enclosures were used to manipulate nutrient loading and exclude macrophytes to determine their impact on the stable state and invertebrate communities at Delta Marsh, Manitoba, a large, freshwater lacustrine wetland. The scope of the study was to provide a comprehensive examination of the roles of all major players in the food web in both water column and among macrophytes, including macroinvertebrates. Turbid conditions with phytoplankton blooms were established when nutrients were added. Zooplankton density was low in all treatments most likely reflecting predation by fathead minnows. Macrophytes did not maintain the clear-water conditions with increased nutrient loading and did not provide a refuge for zooplankton. Macrophyte exclusion alone did not produce a shift to turbid conditions. Density of herbivorous macroinvertebrates that feed on epiphyton showed no response to nutrient addition and did not control algal biomass.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".