MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898738554 · doi:10.1002/lol2.10093

Wind and trophic status explain within and among‐lake variability of algal biomass

2018· article· en· W2898738554 on OpenAlexaff
James A. Rusak, Andrew J. Tanentzap, Jennifer L. Klug, Kevin C. Rose, Susan P. Hendricks, Eleanor Jennings, Alo Laas, Donald C. Pierson, Elizabeth Ryder, Robyn L. Smyth, David S. White, Luke Winslow, Rita Adrian, Лаури Арвола, Elvira de Eyto, Heidrun Feuchtmayr, Márk Honti, Vera Istvánovics, Ian D. Jones, Chris McBride, Silke R. Schmidt, David A. Seekell, Peter A. Stæhr, Guangwei Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueLimnology and Oceanography Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilEuropean Regional Development FundHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeBusiness FinlandInter-American Institute for Global Change ResearchTekesSight Research UKNational Science FoundationEesti TeadusagentuurHelsingin YliopistoUniversity of Michigan
KeywordsTrophic levelBiomass (ecology)Environmental scienceEcologyOceanographyTrophic state indexEutrophicationBiologyNutrientGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Phytoplankton biomass and production regulates key aspects of freshwater ecosystems yet its variability and subsequent predictability is poorly understood. We estimated within‐lake variation in biomass using high‐frequency chlorophyll fluorescence data from 18 globally distributed lakes. We tested how variation in fluorescence at monthly, daily, and hourly scales was related to high‐frequency variability of wind, water temperature, and radiation within lakes as well as productivity and physical attributes among lakes. Within lakes, monthly variation dominated, but combined daily and hourly variation were equivalent to that expressed monthly. Among lakes, biomass variability increased with trophic status while, within‐lake biomass variation increased with increasing variability in wind speed. Our results highlight the benefits of high‐frequency chlorophyll monitoring and suggest that predicted changes associated with climate, as well as ongoing cultural eutrophication, are likely to substantially increase the temporal variability of algal biomass and thus the predictability of the services it provides.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations33
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLimnology and Oceanography LettersSame topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsFrench-language works237,207