The role of bacteria and algae in the diet and distribution of black fly larvae /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Filter-feeding black fly larvae in lake outlet streams convert suspended bacteria and algae into benthic biomass, available to fish. Positive correlations between larval abundance and both bacterioplankton and phytoplankton were significant at the p < 0.10 level among 5 outlet streams of varying trophic status in the Eastern Townships of Quebec, and either food type alone explained ~28% of the variance in larval abundance among streams (Chapter 1), suggesting bacterioplankton and phytoplankton to play similar roles in larval distribution. However, when larvae were removed from 3 of 6 oligotrophic outlet streams examined in the Mauricie region of Quebec, calculated ingestion rates revealed larvae to ingest roughly 20 times more phytoplankton carbon than bacterial carbon (Chapter 2). Phytoplankton ingestion rates were high enough to satisfy daily carbon requirements, but bacterivory was low (Chapter 2), indicating that bacterial biomass contributes little to black fly diets in most systems, and will be less useful than phytoplankton biomass when using food to predict larval distribution. The majority of bacteria in streams form a carbon link to fish through sediment food webs, rather than through black fly larvae.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".