Meta-community processes supersede leaf subsidy effects on lake aquatic communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a growing consensus that cross-ecosystem fluxes significantly influence the structure and stability of aquatic communities. What remains unclear, however, is the relative importance and potential interactions of those fluxes to/with other well-studied factors affecting aquatic community structure such as local environmental parameters or regional-scale influences related to connectivity or habitat size. In this study we compare those different hypotheses by investigating their individual and combined influence on the functional structure of littoral benthic invertebrates’ communities in 7 temperate Canadian lakes (total of 23 sites) located in a semi-protected area. At each site, we sampled macro-invertebrates, we measured C, N, P content of both benthic litter and terrestrial leaves, and we recorded several standard local (pH, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, conductivity, temperature) and regional -scale (perimeter to area ratio, lake connectivity) parameters. We then used a combination of model selection and ordination approaches to disentangle the relative importance of local, regional, and cross-ecosystem factors and their interactions. When considered alone, we found that local factors related to water quality performed best at explaining variations macro-invertebrate community structure. When in combinations, models with both water quality and regional scale variables related to connectivity performed best. However, some functional groups like predator abundances were well correlated to C:N and N:P ratio in sediments (of terrestrial origin). Overall, those results suggest that if stoichiometry (i.e. nutritional quality ) of particulate terrestrial subsidies can have some effects on lake benthic communities, local and regional factors still dominate in explaining invertebrate biodiversity patterns, at least in lakes without steep human land-use gradients. Closing knowledge gaps on cross-ecosystem subsidy effects is important to improve our understanding of how communities and functioning may change under human and/or climate driven changes in watersheds.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".