Spatial linkages between geomorphic and hydraulic conditions and invertebrate drift characteristics in a small mountain stream
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although invertebrate drift plays a fundamental role in river ecosystems, spatial linkages between its characteristics and hydrogeomorphic conditions remain poorly understood. This study, conducted in a small stream in British Columbia, provides insight into such relationships. Most notably, drift concentration was positively correlated with bed scour, and mean body size was negatively correlated with bed fill. Although correlational design precludes inference regarding mechanisms, these results are consistent with protracted effects of flood-related bed disturbances on spatial pattern of drift characteristics under low flow conditions. We detected no robust associations between drift and flow characteristics that could not be explained by bed disturbances. Because of high spatial variability, drift characteristics were statistically distinct only in few habitat types. Compared with middepth, invertebrate drift concentration was higher near water surface, and mean body size was larger near the bed. Mean body size was also statistically smaller in riffle–pool transitions, which experienced largest bed fill. Possible legacy effects of bed disturbances could have broader implications for drift-related energy and nutrient fluxes in river corridors and for quantitative drift models.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".