Species Distribution Models for Mesopelagic Mesozooplankton Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Aim We aimed to enhance our understanding of the distribution of mesopelagic mesozooplankton (MM) using species distribution models, assess the performance of various modelling techniques, identify key environmental predictors for MM distribution and compute their habitat suitability indices. Location Our study focused on the mesopelagic zone globally, with data analysed from different oceans. Taxon Our focus was primarily on mesopelagic mesozooplankton, gathering data on 861 different species from the Mesopelagic Mesozooplankton and Micronekton (MMM) Database. Methods We used an ensemble of species distribution models, applying 10 different modelling algorithms and three multi‐model ensemble approaches. We explored two important factors that can affect model performance: subsampling and the choice of background points. We also estimated the relative importance of various environmental conditions such as mixed layer depth, temperature, salinity, net primary productivity, euphotic zone depth and dissolved nitrate concentration on the distribution of these species. Results Euphotic zone depth, salinity and dissolved nitrate concentration were identified as the most important variables for explaining the distribution of mesopelagic mesozooplankton. The ensemble modelling results were robust in areas with abundant observational records, but high uncertainty was observed in data‐limited regions. We found a patchy habitat suitability map for zooplankton when modelled within their native range, largely due to uneven sampling. Unrestricted range models yielded smoother patterns but could inaccurately project species in areas where they do not occur. Main Conclusions Our study highlights the need for increased sampling effort in data‐limited regions to improve the accuracy of mesopelagic species distribution models. Despite some inaccuracies, unrestricted range models, assuming ecological equivalence (where different species occupying a similar ecological niche in different geographical regions or different ecosystems exhibit similar adaptations and behaviours), provide a reasonable comparison for habitat suitability maps and model performance. It also confirms the significant impact of certain environmental conditions on mesozooplankton distribution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".