Habitat-specific production of aquatic and terrestrial invertebrate drift in small forest streams: implications for drift-feeding fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The influence of stream channel structure on the production of prey for drift-feeding fish is not well understood. We quantified drift production, the entry rate per streambed area, and drift flux, the total export rate per channel unit, in three second-order, forested streams in southwest British Columbia, Canada. We tested whether (1) drift production was higher in riffles than in pools, (2) drift flux increased with riffle length, and (3) prey body size was larger from riffles relative to pools and from terrestrial drop relative to aquatic drift. Total and aquatic-derived drift production (mg·m−2·h−1) was ∼3.5 times higher in riffles relative to pools; however, terrestrial drift did not differ between channel types. Total drift flux (mg·h−1) was positively related to riffle length. Terrestrial invertebrates were approximately three times larger than aquatics, and invertebrates from riffles were approximately three times larger on average than those from pools. These results suggest that channel structure directly affects prey availability and prey quality for drift-feeding fish and that long riffles may be key areas of prey generation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".