MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210907705 · doi:10.1002/lol2.10229

Effects of freshwater salinization on a salt‐naïve planktonic eukaryote community

2022· article· en· W4210907705 on OpenAlexaff
Louis Astorg, Jean‐Christophe Gagnon, Cassandre Sara Lazar, Alison M. Derry

Bibliographic record

VenueLimnology and Oceanography Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanktonPhytoplanktonSalinityChlorophytaZooplanktonChlorideSoil salinityEnvironmental chemistryChemistryBiologyEcologyAlgaeNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Freshwater salinization is a widespread issue, but evidence of ecological effects on aquatic communities remains scarce. We experimentally exposed salt‐naive plankton communities of a north‐temperate, freshwater lake to a gradient of chloride (Cl−) concentration (0.27–1400 mg Cl L−1) with in situ mesocosms. Following 6 weeks, we measured changes in the diversity, composition, and abundance of eukaryotic 18S rRNA gene. Total phytoplankton biomass remained unchanged, but we observed a shift in dominant phytoplankton groups with increasing salt concentration, from Cryptophyta and Chlorophyta at lower chloride concentrations (< 185 mg Cl− L−1) to Ochrophyta at higher chloride concentrations (> 185 mg Cl− L−1). Crustacean zooplankton and rotifers were sensitive to the salinity, and disappeared at low chloride concentrations (< 40 mg Cl− L−1). While ciliates thrived at low chloride concentrations (< 185 mg Cl− L−1), fungal groups dominated at intermediate chloride concentrations (185–640 mg Cl− L−1), and only phytoplankton remained at the highest chloride concentrations (> 640 mg Cl− L−1).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLimnology and Oceanography LettersSame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207