Benthic algal communities: recovery from experimental acidificationThis paper is part of the series “Forty Years of Aquatic Research at the Experimental Lakes Area”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemical recovery is hypothesized to promote rapid recovery of benthic algal communities in formerly acidified lakes; this expectation needs modification. We evaluated the hypothesis in a small lake (L302S) in the boreal forest of northwestern Ontario, Canada, during a decade of pH recovery following a prior decade of experimental acidification from pH 6.7 to 4.5. To account for regional changes during the study, we also studied a nearby reference lake (L239). Taxonomic changes in the epilithon (biofilm on rock surfaces) included persistently lower cyanobacterial biomass following its acidification-related decline and increases in both diatoms and greens. Epilithic metabolic recovery was incomplete because the acidification-induced increase in respiration continued, although the prior decline in photosynthesis was reversed. Unexpectedly, blooms of metaphytic filamentous green algae occurred at higher pH during recovery than during acidification. Although several community attributes recovered fully, recovery of many aggregate functional and taxonomic properties lagged improvements in pH. Divergence was greater at the taxonomic than at the functional level. Despite pH recovery, potential causes of incomplete algal recovery include incomplete chemical recovery and the persistent absence of functionally important biota. Our findings counter the assumption that ecological recovery mirrors the pathway of damage caused by a human stressor.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".