Do allochthonous flows explain deviations from the Redfield ratio in lakes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lakes or streams show strong deviations of their stoichiometry compared to the Redfield ratio measured in oceans. Allochthonous inflows of resources might contribute to those deviations directly, by changing composition of detritus in ecosystems, but also indirectly, by shaping local community dynamics and stoichiometric constrains within aquatic ecosystems. Here, we developed a stoichiometric model to understand those direct and indirect mechanisms through which allochthonous inflows affect seston stoichiometry. Our results emphasize that increasing allochthonous inflows promotes heterotrophic functioning, and relax decomposer’ carbon limitation. This release of stoichiometric constrain of decomposers (i) destabilizes the aquatic ecosystem by promoting competition between phytoplankton and decomposers, (ii) decreases the ability of the lake to regulate allochthonous flows, and (iii) push seston stoichiometry away from the Redfield ratio. Our study emphasize how the quantity and the stoichiometry of inflows shape community dynamics and the elemental constraints within the ecosystem, and open perspectives for stoichiometry at the landscape extent.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".