MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888320280 · doi:10.1111/1752-1688.12683

Differing Modes of Biotic Connectivity within Freshwater Ecosystem Mosaics

2018· article· en· W2888320280 on OpenAlexaff
David Mushet, Laurie C. Alexander, Micah G. Bennett, Kate A. Schofield, Jay R. Christensen, Geneviève Ali, Amina I. Pollard, Ken M. Fritz, Megan Lang

Bibliographic record

VenueJAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsWetlandHabitatEcologyEcosystemAquatic ecosystemBiotaTerrestrial ecosystemLandscape ecologyEnvironmental sciencePopulationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a collection of aquatic and wetland habitats in an inland landscape, and their occurrence within a terrestrial matrix, as a "freshwater ecosystem mosaic" (FEM). Aquatic and wetland habitats in any FEM can vary widely, from permanently ponded lakes, to ephemerally ponded wetlands, to groundwater-fed springs, to flowing rivers and streams. The terrestrial matrix can also vary, including in its influence on flows of energy, materials, and organisms among ecosystems. Biota occurring in a specific region are adapted to the unique opportunities and challenges presented by spatial and temporal patterns of habitat types inherent to each FEM. To persist in any given landscape, most species move to recolonize habitats and maintain mixtures of genetic materials. Species also connect habitats through time if they possess needed morphological, physiological, or behavioral traits to persist in a habitat through periods of unfavorable environmental conditions. By examining key spatial and temporal patterns underlying FEMs, and species-specific adaptations to these patterns, a better understanding of the structural and functional connectivity of a landscape can be obtained. Fully including aquatic, wetland, and terrestrial habitats in FEMs facilitates adoption of the next generation of individual-based models that integrate the principles of population, community, and ecosystem ecology.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations39
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources AssociationSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207