MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406823299 · doi:10.1029/2024gl110601

The Metabolic Balance of Lake Superior's Mixed Layer

2025· article· en· W4406823299 on OpenAlexaff
Panditha V. S. L. Gunawardana, Nolan J. T. Pearce, Jay A. Austin, Thomas Hollenhorst, Joel C. Hoffman, Marguerite A. Xenopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryTrent University
FundersDirectorate for EngineeringU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsBalance (ability)Mixed layerLayer (electronics)Water balanceGeologyEnvironmental scienceClimatologyBiologyChemistryGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding carbon (C) dynamics in large lake ecosystems poses challenges due to their size, causing uncertainty in their contribution to the global C cycle. Here, we used autonomous underwater vehicles to calculate upper mixed‐column (UMC) metabolism in Lake Superior. We paired 7 years of high‐resolution dissolved oxygen and temperature data from 17 glider missions with in situ meteorological data to calculate daily gross primary production, ecosystem respiration, and net ecosystem metabolism. We found the UMC of Lake Superior to be net heterotrophic (primary production < ecosystem respiration) most of the time, suggesting its role as a net source of CO 2 to the atmosphere. Heterotrophy was pronounced during cold and transitional days (<14°C) and in nearshore regions (<10 km distance from the shore). When scaled, our results indicate that Lake Superior released 84–112 Tg CO 2 y −1 , which is twice the rate of C it fixes from the UMC itself.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→