MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981297561 · doi:10.1111/fwb.13420

The growth of juvenile native mussels (<i>Elliptio complanata</i>) in lakes varies with sediment characteristics and site exposure

2019· article· en· W2981297561 on OpenAlexafffund
Hélène Cyr

Bibliographic record

VenueFreshwater Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsToronto ZooUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsJuvenileMusselInvertebrateSedimentPlanktonUnionidaeEcologyBiologyMolluscaFisheryBivalviaEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Unionid mussels are among the largest and longest‐lived freshwater invertebrates and can play an important role in these ecosystems. They are also one of the most endangered groups of organisms. The juvenile stage is a particularly vulnerable part of mussel life history and is one of the most poorly known. I compared the growth of young Elliptio complanata at 17 nearshore sites, in shallow (polymictic) and stratified lake basins, along gradients of sediment characteristics and site exposure (effective fetch). At each site, the growth of six to 14 small (20–68 mm) mussels collected on the sediment surface was measured, using internal growth lines. The growth of very young endobenthic mussels (22–40 mm) was also measured on four to six mussels at each of two sites. Juveniles spend several years in the sediments, and I found that during this period growth is not constant but declines rapidly with age. Shifts in δ15N signatures suggest that juveniles change their habitat use towards a more planktonic baseline around the time of maturation, when they reach a length of 30–50 mm. Identical δ13C signatures in juveniles and adults suggest that both rely on food of planktonic origin, whether deposited or suspended. The growth of juvenile mussels varies in a complex but predictable manner with sediment characteristics and wind‐driven physical forces. Growth was highest in fine sediments with low organic content, in highly organic but coarse sediments, and in protected nearshore areas with low effective fetch. Interestingly, I also found high growth rates at exposed nearshore areas with fine sediments, suggesting that areas where bottom topography creates a refuge from currents and waves may provide particularly good conditions for the early growth of juvenile mussels. Some parts of the shoreline may be more important than others for native mussel populations, and if we can identify those, they may warrant additional protection.

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)0.000
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFreshwater BiologySame topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207