MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413042449 · doi:10.1016/j.ecoinf.2025.103372

Contrasting the efficiency of imaging systems for mesozooplankton indicators across Pacific and Atlantic coastal ecosystems

2025· article· en· W4413042449 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Biology and Ecology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHuntsman Marine Science CentreFisheries and Oceans CanadaSorbonne UniversitéAssociation for Molecular Pathology
KeywordsEcosystemOceanographyEnvironmental scienceMarine ecosystemClimatologyRemote sensingEcologyGeographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mesozooplankton have a pivotal role in marine food webs, linking primary producers to higher trophic levels. Their abundance and traits serve as key indicators of ecosystem structure and function, making them essential components of long-term ocean monitoring. However, the need to monitor biodiversity and functional traits, combined with their pronounced spatial and temporal variability, requires extensive sampling and presents significant laboratory bottlenecks and cost-related challenges. Imaging instruments, combined with automated image classifiers such as Ecotaxa, offer a promising solution by enabling high-throughput, cost-effective processing of large numbers of samples, while also providing highly precise trait measurements previously unattainable with traditional methods. In this study, we compare the performance of human-sorted microscopy, human-sorted images and computer-sorted images across three contrasting coastal ecosystems on Canada's Pacific and Atlantic coasts. First, we demonstrated that upfront investment in identifying a larger number of images contributed to the development of robust regional image libraries, which significantly enhanced the performance of automated classifiers (e.g., mean F1 score = 0.54 with up to 200 images per taxon and 0.68 with up to 5000 images per taxon). Results showed that automated image classification performance varies with specimen characteristics such as symmetry, geodesic thickness, and taxa richness. We then assessed how each method captures local mesozooplankton diversity and altered key ecological indicators. Based on observed ecosystem-specific differences, we provide recommendations for optimizing classification workflows in relation to local diversity patterns. This study provides large-scale empirical evidence that investing in the development of regional image libraries enhances the scalability and accuracy of coastal ecological assessments. These emerging digital assets have the potential to significantly advance ecosystem monitoring and management. • Differences in automated zooplankton classification performance between regions. • Larger regional image libraries led to better model performance. • Differences between microscopy and imaging between regions. • Taxonomic resolution impacted classification accuracy.

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.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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