The intriguing co-distribution of the copepods <i>Calanus hyperboreus</i> and <i>Calanus glacialis</i> in the subsurface chlorophyll maximum of Arctic seas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studying the distribution of zooplankton in relation to their prey and predators is challenging, especially in situ. Recent developments in underwater imaging enable such fine-scale research. We deployed the Lightframe On-sight Keyspecies Investigation (LOKI) image profiler to study the fine-scale (1 m) vertical distribution of the copepods Calanus hyperboreus and C. glacialis in relation to the subsurface chlorophyll maximum (SCM) at the end of the grazing season in August in the North Water and Nares Strait (Canadian Arctic). The vertical distribution of both species was generally consistent with the predictions of the Predator Avoidance Hypothesis. In the absence of a significant SCM, both copepods remained at depth during the night. In the presence of a significant SCM, copepods remained at depth in daytime and a fraction of the population migrated in the SCM at night. All three profiles where the numerically dominant copepodite stages C4 and C5 of the two species grazed in the SCM at night presented the same intriguing pattern: the abundance of C. hyperboreus peaked in the core of the SCM while that of C. glacialis peaked just above and below the core SCM. These distributions of the same-stage congeners in the SCMs were significantly different. Lipid fullness of copepod individuals was significantly higher in C. hyperboreus in the core SCM than in C. glacialis above and below the core SCM. Foraging interference resulting in the exclusion from the core SCM of the smaller C. glacialis by the larger C. hyperboreus could explain this vertical partitioning of the actively grazing copepodite stages of the two species. Alternatively, specific preferences for microalgal and/or microzooplankton food hypothetically occupying different layers in the SCM could explain the observed partitioning. Investigating the observed fine-scale co-distributions further will enable researchers to better predict potential climate change effects on these important Arctic congeners.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".