MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324362213 · doi:10.3390/rs15061601

Cyanobacteria Index as a Tool for the Satellite Detection of Cyanobacteria Blooms in the Baltic Sea

2023· article· en· W4324362213 on OpenAlexaff
Marta Konik, Katarzyna Bradtke, Joanna Stoń‐Egiert, Monika Soja‐Woźniak, Sylwia Śliwińska‐Wilczewska, Mirosław Darecki

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsMount Allison UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyanobacteriaEnvironmental scienceBloomAlgal bloomRadiancePhycocyaninOceanographyEcologyRemote sensingPhytoplanktonBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyanobacteria blooms in the Baltic Sea have been studied for years due to their toxicity, which negatively affects all biota, along with the influence of these floating colonies on surface fluxes. However, mapping these blooms is still a challenge since their high dynamics, wide coverage, and specific radiometric footprint hinder atmospheric correction and negatively affect the quality of satellite images. In this study, we assessed the use of an alternative approach called the cyanobacteria index (CI), which is based on the reflectance spectral shape and which does not require comprehensive atmospheric correction. We demonstrated a close relationship between the positive CI values, indicating the presence of blooms, and the concentration of phycocyanin, the marker pigment of filamentous cyanobacteria in the Baltic Sea. We proved that the CI index could efficiently identify cyanobacteria-dominated blooms where colonies floated near the surface. Therefore, this index represents a valuable complement to the previous monitoring methods, suitable for extreme bloom events. The analysis of a time series of satellite images obtained between 2002 and 2018 using the CI index revealed the elongation of the bloom season, which may have been a consequence of the water temperature remaining within the cyanobacteria’s tolerance range for a longer time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207