The use of WHAM-FTOX, parameterized with laboratory data, to simulate zooplankton species richness in acid- and metal- contaminated lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The WHAM- F TOX model quantifies cation toxicity towards freshwater organisms, assuming an additive toxic response to the amounts of protons and metals accumulated by an organism. We combined a parameterization of the model, using data from multi-species laboratory toxicity tests, with a fitted field species sensitivity distribution, to simulate the species richness ( n sp ) of crustacean zooplankton in acid- and metal-contaminated lakes near Sudbury, Ontario over several decades, and also in reference (uncontaminated) lakes. A good description of variation in toxic response among the zooplankton species was achieved with a log-normal distribution of a new parameter, β , which characterizes an organism’s intrinsic sensitivity towards toxic cations; the greater is β , the more sensitive is the species. The use of β assumes that while species vary in their sensitivity, the relative toxicities of different metals are the same for each species (common relative sensitivity). Unbiased agreements between simulated and observed n sp were obtained with a high correlation ( r 2 = 0.81, p < 0.0001, n = 217). Variations in zooplankton species richness in the Sudbury lakes are calculated to be dominated by toxic responses to H, Al, Cu and Ni, with a small contribution from Zn, and negligible effects of Cd, Hg and Pb. According to the model, some of the Sudbury lakes were affected predominantly by acidification (H and Al), while others were most influenced by toxic heavy metals (Ni, Cu, Zn); for lakes in the latter category, the relative importance of heavy metals, compared to H and Al, has increased over time. The results suggest that, if common relative sensitivity operates, n sp can be modelled on the basis of a single set of parameters characterizing the average toxic effects of different cations, together with a species sensitivity distribution.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".