Taxonomic and functional differences between winter and summer crustacean zooplankton communities in lakes across a trophic gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Despite increasing interest in winter limnology, few studies have examined under-ice zooplankton communities and the factors shaping them in different types of temperate lakes. To better understand drivers of zooplankton community structure in winter and summer, we sampled 13 lakes across a large trophic status gradient for crustacean zooplankton abundance, taxonomic and functional community composition and C/N stable isotopes. Average winter zooplankton densities were one-third of summer densities across the study lakes. Proportionally, cladocerans were more abundant in summer than winter, with the opposite pattern for calanoids and cyclopoids. In green (eutrophic) lakes, zooplankton densities were higher under the ice than in brown (dystrophic) and blue (oligotrophic) lakes, suggesting better conditions for zooplankton in productive lakes during winter. Overall, zooplankton communities were more similar across lakes under the ice than during the open water season. Feeding group classification showed a decrease in herbivore abundance and an increase in predators from summer to winter. C/N stable isotope results suggested higher lipid content in overwintering zooplankton and potentially increased reliance on the microbial loop by winter zooplankton. Our results show substantial variation in the seasonality of zooplankton communities in different lake types and identify some of the factors responsible for this variation.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".