Effects of tributary size on the resource supply and physical habitat at tributary junctions along two mainstem rivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tributary junctions are regarded as ecologically important due to unique habitat present; however, there is limited understanding of the drivers of habitat attributes at these locations. Using six sites across two mainstem rivers, we tested whether tributary size relative to main stem governs the strength and direction of response of substrate size, stream temperature, and nutrient and coarse particulate organic matter (CPOM) concentration. We found that only phosphorus and CPOM concentration showed a significant relationship with relative tributary size. Small tributaries contributed high concentrations, whereas concentrations in larger tributaries resembled the main stem. Often, tributary exports were enough to increase the resource concentration in the main stem by 40%. Substrate coarsened by ∼60% downstream of tributaries. Temperature asynchrony was observed, where tributaries contributed water between 2.8 °C cooler to 1.9 °C warmer than the main stem within one diel period. Our results highlight the importance of small tributaries for whole network functioning. However, large spatiotemporal variability revealed how habitat attributes are highly context-dependent in these locations and may be difficult to predict in both scientific and management settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".