Evaluating Trophic Status as a Proxy of Aquatic Ecosystem Service Provisioning on the Basis of Guidelines
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ecologists typically associate water quality with trophic status, where oligotrophic is considered excellent and presumably provides more aquatic ecosystem services. However, water quality is perceived differently among observers with different worldviews. For example, agriculture and public health sectors quantify the provisioning of aquatic ecosystem services on the basis of different guidelines, but are their guidelines breached more frequently with increasing productivity? We developed an integrative ecosystem service framework using Canadian guidelines as thresholds for drinking, swimming, irrigation, suitability for livestock and aquatic wildlife in rivers. Drinkability was the most sensitive ecosystem service, met in 23% of the sampling events, whereas livestock was provided in 99%. Trophic status is a fair proxy for ecosystem services limited by fecal contamination, because nutrients are related to human and animal populations but not to those limited by metals. Using guideline thresholds to assess the safe provisioning of multiple aquatic ecosystem services across diverse worldviews could facilitate understanding among different perspectives.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it