Resistance but not recovery is related to the role of specialist taxa in river communities submitted to hydric stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the main effects of global change is the human interference in the global water cycle, which alters river hydrological dynamics and submits their biological communities to hydric stress. Hydric stress is a pulse disturbance with potential multiple effects on biodiversity and functions in river ecosystems. The presence of habitat specialists may support the response of biological communities to pulse disturbances, maintaining ecological functions more consistently than other communities only having generalists. We tested this general hypothesis in stream communities submitted to increasing hydric stress (normal conditions vs humidity vs desiccation). We used communities with variable proportion of specialist algal and cyanobacterial taxa and tested their resistance to hydric stress by analyzing potential changes on their number of species, biovolume, proportion of intact cells, and photosynthetic variables (basal fluorescence, photosynthetic yield). We also evaluated the recovery of ecological functions (net community primary production, community respiration, phosphorus uptake) once hydric stress conditions ended. Hydric stress caused a slight decrease in the number of species and biovolume of assemblages, but the proportion of intact cells did not significantly change because of the disturbance. Basal fluorescence and photosynthetic yield under hydric stress decreased more markedly in communities without specialist taxa, while communities with habitat specialists resisted better. Metabolism did not remarkably decrease under moderate hydric stress, but dropped by half under desiccation in all communities, having or not specialist taxa. Overall, specialist taxa did provide higher resistance to stress but did not support a distinct recovery of ecological functions. We suggest that this characteristic response is related to the high plasticity of biofilm structures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".