Contribution of Zooplankton to Vertical Carbon Fluxes \nin the Kara and White Seas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data on the zooplankton community structure, gut evacuation rate \nand carbon content of zooplankton faecal pellets were used for assessing the \ncontribution of zooplankton to vertical carbon fluxes in the White and Kara \nSeas. The results revealed strong regional and seasonal variations of pellet \ncarbon input related to differences in structure and dynamics of the \nzooplankton communities in the regions studied. In the deep regions of the \nWhite Sea, maximum daily pellet carbon flux from the 0-50 m layer was \nobserved in the spring. It reached 98 mg Corg m-2 day-1 and coincided with a \nstrong predominance of the large arctic herbivorous copepod Calanus \nglacialis in the surface layers. In summer and fall, it decreased by 1 to 2 orders \nof magnitude due to migration of this copepod to its overwintering depths. In \ncontrast, in the shallow coastal regions, the pellet production was low in \nspring, gradually increased during summer and reached its maximum of 138 \nmg Corg m-2 day-1 by late summer to beginning of autumn. Such a seasonal \npattern was in accordance with the seasonal variation of abundance of major \npellet producers, the small boreal copepods Acartia bifilosa, Centropages \nhamatus, and Temora longicornis. In the estuarine zone of the Kara Sea, the \npellet flux was mostly formed by pellets of brackish-water omnivorous copepods. \nIt varied from 35 mg Corg m-2 day-1 in 1997 to 96 mg Corg m-2 day-1 in 1999. \nIn the central Kara Sea with its typical marine community, the daily flux \nreached 125 mg Corg m-2 day-1 in summer. The results of our calculations indicate \nthat both in the White and Kara seas zooplankton pellet carbon contributes \nup to 30 % to the total carbon flux during particular seasons.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".