Comparison of the vertical distribution of pelagic copepod abundance, biomass and community structure between the Atlantic and Pacific sectors of the Arctic Ocean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared copepod abundance, biomass and community structure in the Atlantic sector (Fram Strait) and Pacific sector (Canada Basin) of the Arctic Ocean by using vertical stratified zooplankton samples collected from 0-1,000 m or 0-1,500 m during daytime in summer. Abundance and biomass were high at the surface layer and decreased with increasing depth in both regions. Abundance and biomass in the surface layer in the Fram Strait were 6-18 times higher than those in the Canada Basin. According to cluster analysis, the copepod communities were separated into three groups that varied vertically and included both locations. Regional differences were marked for Calanus finmarchicus, which was distributed only in the Fram Strait. In the Canada Basin, Spinocalanidae composed 56.1% of calanoid copepod abundance for the bathypelagic groups and also contributed 7.5% of abundance throughout the water column. The dominance of Spinocalanidae may reflect the oligotrophic environment in the Pacific sector of the Arctic Ocean.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".