Fish Diversity and Use of Nearshore and Open-Water Habitats in Terminal Lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Terminal lakes face conservation challenges due to consumptive water use and changes in climate. We quantified the extent of the littoral and open water zones in 18 terminal lakes spanning five continents and show that lake level declines produce variable changes in littoral zone surface area. While littoral zones account for a small portion of the habitat in these lakes, 77% of the fish species inhabit these zones and 87.5% consume littoral–benthic organisms. We found that littoral zone surface area correlates with littoral zone fish species richness (P < 0.01; R2 = 0.47) as well as the number of species relying on benthos (P < 0.01; R2 = 0.44). However, we found (1) no correlation between the percent of the lake's surface area that is littoral and the percent of the fish community that inhabits the littoral zone (Pearson's r = 0.3; P = 0.3), and (2) no correlation between the percent of the lake's surface area that is littoral and the percent of the fish community that consumes benthic organisms (Pearson's r = −0.1; P = 0.8). Because many terminal lakes are desiccating, conservation of biodiversity in the nearshore zones of these lakes may be warranted.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".