Plankton monitoring in the Northwest Atlantic: a comparison of zooplankton abundance estimates from vertical net tows and Continuous Plankton Recorder sampling on the Scotian and Newfoundland shelves, 1999–2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Assessment of zooplankton abundance, distribution, community composition, and temporal variability is critical to understanding the effects of climate variability and change on lower trophic level production and availability for consumption by larger consumers. Zooplankton sampling is performed across the Canadian continental shelf system by Fisheries and Oceans Canada's Atlantic Zone Monitoring Programme (AZMP). Sampling includes semi-monthly to monthly collection of zooplankton using vertical net tows (VNTs) deployed from near-bottom to surface at stations on the central Scotian Shelf (Stn 2, 150 m depth) and Newfoundland Shelf (Stn 27, 175 m depth), and by Continuous Plankton Recorders (CPRs) in the near-surface layers along routes over the Scotian and Newfoundland shelves (0–10 m depth). Here, we compare abundance metrics for 11 copepod taxa collected using both gear types in both regions between 1999 and 2015. Seasonal cycles of VNT and CPR abundance were similar for near-surface residents. VNT: CPR abundance ratios varied year-round for vertical migrants, as ontogenetic migrants shifted their vertical distribution, and as diel migrants changed their migratory behaviour. For some taxa, differences in annual average VNT: CPR abundance ratios between regions suggest differences in vertical distribution, while for others differences in inter-annual variability for VNT and CPR abundances suggest differences in the dynamics of the near- and sub-surface components of the populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".