Species succession and the development of a lacustrine fish community in an ephemeral lake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Here, we present a gillnet survey of Lake Liambezi a 370 km2 shallow ephemeral floodplain lake situated in north‐eastern Namibia, which is fed irregularly by the upper Zambezi and Kwando Rivers during years of high flooding. The lake dried up in 1985 and, with the exception of sporadic minor annual inundation events, remained dry until 2007. We describe the temporal succession of fish species over an 8 year period from initial inundation 2007 to maturation in 2014. The succession of the fish community did not follow the typical pattern of opportunistic strategists during colonisation, to periodic strategists that are eventually succeeded by equilibrium strategists. Instead, the evolution of the fish community was characterised by three distinct phases. The first phase involved the inundation and colonisation of the lake in 2007, followed by its decline until the floods that filled the lake in 2009. During this phase the lake was colonised by fishes from the adjacent upper Zambezi and Chobe River floodplains. Fish communities predominantly comprised floodplain specialists including the barbs Enteromius paludinosus and Enteromius poechii, the mormyrid Marcusenius altisambesi and catfishes Schilbe intermedius and Clarias gariepinus. The filling of the lake in the March 2009 floods marked the beginning of the second, successional phase. The barbs declined in abundance and the alestid Rhabdalestes maunensis underwent explosive population growth between 2009 and 2010, but populations crashed equally rapidly and were replaced by Brycinus lateralis which, together with S. intermedius went on to dominate the fish community 2011–2014. Larger, slower growing tilapiine cichlids increased steadily in abundance and became the dominant components in a 2700 t y–1 artisanal fishery that developed on the lake. The fish community in the ephemeral Lake Liambezi is clearly influenced by numerous factors including connectivity, lake level fluctuations, competition and the effects of fishing, which may disrupt typical succession processes in floodplain ecosystems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".