Long‐term limnological changes in the Ecuadorian páramo: Comparing the ecological responses to climate warming of shallow waterbodies versus deep lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Páramos are high‐altitude ecosystems of grasslands and shrubs that sustain high levels of biodiversity and contain numerous lakes, ponds and wetlands that are a crucial source of water for millions. In the Andes, limnological data are rare from páramos and particularly so from shallow waterbodies that are prominent features of the landscape. Here, we analyse fossil diatom assemblages using dated sediment cores from three shallow lakes in the páramo of southern Ecuador and document their response to recent climate changes. The two shallowest sites were <0.5 m deep and contained nearly identical diatom assemblages, dominated byAchnanthidium minutissimumand other benthic taxa. The deepest study site, at 4 m depth, differed notably from its shallower counterparts in that the dominant taxa were tychoplanktonicAulacoseiraspecies. All three study sites showed only minor assemblage shifts over the past ˜200 years. This contrasts sharply with paleolimnological data from nearby deep lakes (Zmax > 17 m) that recorded abrupt changes in diatom phytoplankton coincident with the onset of higher temperatures, reduced wind speeds and the onset of thermal stratification in recent decades. In temperate and high‐latitude regions, an overriding factor influencing freshwater ecosystems is the duration and extent of ice cover, which itself is closely linked to climate variables. In contrast, there is no winter ice cover and the growing season is continuous year round in our equatorial Andean sites. Instead, rising temperatures are affecting deep lakes primarily by altering the physical structure of the water column resulting in greater periods of thermal stratification, which in turn drives changes in biota and other lake processes. However, this mechanism of change only affects deep lakes because shallow waterbodies are easily mixed by wind. Our data demonstrate the differential response of large, deep lakes in the páramo compared to the relative complacency of changes in shallow waterbodies, which is in marked contrast to similar sites affected by seasonal ice cover.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".