Diversity and vertical distribution of nematode assemblages the Saguenay fjord (Quebec, Canada) environmental
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three stations were sampled for a meiofaunal survey in the Saguenay fjord's inner basin (Quebec, Canada). Nematodes were the dominant taxon accounting for 90 % of total individuals. Twenty nematode families and 55 genera were found. Cluster analysis showed two different depth-segregated nematode assemblages, one in the surface layer (0-2 cm) and the other in the subsurface layer (2-10 cm) of the sediment column. A comparison between abundance and biomass vertical distributions showed that smaller individuals were dominant in the surface sediment layer, while larger individuals dominated in subsurface sediment. Selective deposit-feeders were the most abundant feeding group, while epigrowth-feeders were dominant in terms of biomass. Diversity tended to decrease in downstream areas of the fjord. Species composition and size spectra at the three stations suggest the succession of different meiofaunal communities along the fjord. Abundance- biomass comparison (ABC) plots suggested that upstream areas were moderately disturbed. The difference between Shannon's index in terms of abundance and biomass (H'δ = H'abund - H'biom) is suggested to be a useful tool in detecting environmental disturbance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".