Ecology of algal blooms in the Bay of Quinte: composition, diversity and dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A total of 25 algal blooms were observed during three separate surveys of the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario, conducted during August 2010, September 2010 and September 2011. Here we define algal blooms based on the direct measurement of phytoplankton biomass (>3 g m−3) and not proxy measures such as chlorophyll a. In this chronically eutrophic embayment, we observed 8 diatom blooms (Aulacoseira spp.), 7 cyanobacteria blooms (Dolichospermum, Gloeotrichia, Microcystis, etc.) and 10 more that were mixtures of both taxa. At the cyano-bloom sites, ≈50% or more of the total biomass was composed of species known to be toxigenic. High rates of primary production (40 – 160 mg C m−3 h−1) by the larger algal size classes (>20 μm and 2–20 μm) indicated that there were few constraints on photosynthesis during bloom events (both diatom and cyanobacteria). Productivity to biomass quotients were considerably higher for filamentous algal forms (>9 for both diatoms and cyanobacteria) compared to colonial cyanobacteria (<5) suggesting that filamentous algae are more photosynthetically efficient. Our findings showed the observed algal blooms to be diverse and dynamic entities; management strategies need to recognize the unique characteristics of individual bloom events. Moreover, long term research and monitoring programs are necessary for the application of adaptive management strategies in order to address persistent ecosystem stressors like eutrophication.
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 | 0.001 | 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".