MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162034383 · doi:10.82308/18120

The relative contribution of pelagic primary production to the littoral food web of lakes /

2001· dissertation· en· W7162034383 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guillaume. Chagnon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelagic zoneLittoral zoneFood webMacrophyteTrophic levelZooplanktonIsotope analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A dual stable isotope approach (delta13C and delta15N) was used to assess the importance of pelagic organic carbon in littoral secondary production and explore its predictability. Forty-seven sites were sampled in Lake Memphremagog (Quebec--Vermont) to characterize the isotopic position of the primary producers and filter-feeding freshwater mussels, as well as macrophyte biomass, chlorophyll-a concentration, and site exposure. The different sites spanned a wide range in the three environmental variables. For each site, littoral, terrestrial, and pelagic contributions to the diet of the mussels were calculated from mussel isotopic position, corrected for trophic enrichment. The mean contributions were: littoral---8%, terrestrial---27%, and pelagic---65%. However, the magnitude of the pelagic contribution was not related to macrophyte biomass, site exposure or chlorophyll-a concentration. The finding that the unionid mussels, a major littoral zone filter-feeder, obtain about two-thirds of their nutrition from pelagic zone particles washed into the littoral zone provides evidence for a close coupling in carbon flow of the littoral and pelagic zone. This study represents an important step towards a better understanding of carbon flow in aquatic food webs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior→French-language works237,207→