MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2770428303 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2017-0121

Predation by introduced fish can magnify the terrestrial arthropod subsidies in mountain lakes

2017· article· en· W2770428303 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Matteo Rolla, Geordie Biffoni, Stefano Brighenti, Rocco Iacobuzio, Kévin Liautaud, Cristian Pasquaretta, Rocco Tiberti

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationSalvelinusEcologyTroutBiomass (ecology)Terrestrial ecosystemTrophic cascadeArthropodHabitatLake ecosystemInvertebrateBiologyEcosystemPredatory fishForage fishStockingEnvironmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryFood web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A portion of the terrestrial subsidies to lentic habitats consists of arthropods. In high mountain, originally fishless lakes, terrestrial arthropods are an important seasonal food resource for introduced fish. Here we investigate how brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) can alter the input of terrestrial arthropods in 10 high mountain lakes contrasting for their stocking history (with and without fish or manipulated for fish eradication). We used a food consumption model to calculate the minimum and maximum number or biomass of arthropods consumed by fish, and we found that they can exceed, by several folds, the number or biomass of arthropods sinking into the lakes, at least under the metabolic rates expected for fish for most of the summer. We interpret this result as an indirect indication that arthropods usually cannot overcome the surface tension at the lake surface and that fish can work as a vector across the water–air interface. We infer that pathways for dead and live arthropods to leave the lakes do exist and fish can transfer into the water column many arthropods whose fate was leaving the lakes, which may have overlooked ecological and conservation implications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→