Benthic assemblage variation among channel units in high-gradient streams on Vancouver Island, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We characterized channel unit types in 13 steep, headwater streams in British Columbia, Canada, based on physical variables, to determine the influence of channel unit type on benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages. Macroinvertebrate abundance was highest in riffles, followed by rapids, pools, boulder cascades, chutes, and bedrock cascades. Heptageniidae, Nemouridae, Chironomidae, Leptophlebiidae, Enchytraeidae, Chloroperlidae, Lepidostomatidae, and Tricladida were most abundant in either riffles or rapids. Baetidae and Simuliidae preferred bedrock cascades and chutes, and predominance of these families resulted in a distinct assemblage structure within these 2 channel unit types compared with other types. Benthic assemblages within riffles, rapids, pools, and boulder cascades were not distinctive from each other. Significant interstream variation was apparent in abundance of all taxonomic groups studied. In general, invertebrates were more abundant in streams with perennial flow regimes compared to those with intermittent or ephemeral flow. Assemblage structure within ephemeral streams was distinct because of the preponderance of Enchytraeidae. Defining physical characteristics of stream channel units using benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages is a useful means of discriminating habitat conditions within small, high-gradient streams.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".