{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03126149319602795, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008091210003677823, 'mean_word_length': 6.028423772609819, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Water chemistry, landscape, and spatial controls of δ
 13
 C and δ
 15
 N of zooplankton taxa in boreal lakes: One size does not fit all

Carbon (δ¹³C) and nitrogen (δ¹⁵N) stable isotope ratios of zooplankton are potentially good indicators of energy and nutrient fluxes, and trophic interactions in lake food‐webs, yet, are poorly understood. Based on a synoptic survey of 233 boreal lakes, we evaluated the relationships of water chemistry, hydromorphological, and land cover variables (lake/catchment‐specific factors), and the spatial position of lakes in the landscape (representing potential regional factors) with the δ¹³C and δ¹⁵N of nine meso‐zooplankton taxa. The δ¹³C variation of most taxa was negatively related to water chemistry variables associated with allochthonous inputs (colour/dissolved organic carbon), and positively correlated with nutrient concentrations (together explaining 12–69% of variation). Most of the δ¹³C variation explained by significant hydromorphological and land cover variables (% peat area, drainage basin area:lake area, shoreline development index, and lake area, explaining 26–47% of variation) was shared by significant water chemistry variables. Together, this suggests that δ¹³C variation of zooplankton reflects different environmental influences on δ¹³C of lake primary producers. The δ¹⁵N variation of most taxa was significantly related to pH, total phosphorous concentration (water chemistry variables, explaining 8–64% of variation), and water retention time (hydromorphological variable, explaining 13–87% of variation). These relationships are probably reflective of the association of zooplankton δ¹⁵N with terrestrial organic matter flux, environmentally‐induced biogeochemical nitrogen transformations and phytoplankton ¹⁵N fractionation. Specific water chemistry, hydromorphological, and land cover predictors of δ¹³C and δ¹⁵N and the direction of their effects (i.e. positive or negative) were largely similar among taxa. However, their degree of importance varied among taxa particularly for δ¹³C, probably due to contrasting feeding selectivity and resulting differences in allochthony. This suggests that δ¹³C of different taxa may respond differently to changes in limnological gradients due to environmental perturbations affecting boreal regions. The lake/catchment‐specific factors were more important than regional factors (lithology, soil properties and atmospheric nitrogen deposition; which are represented by the spatial position of lakes) in explaining δ¹³C and δ¹⁵N variation of zooplankton. Hence, before inferring regional effects in stable isotope studies, the influence of lake/catchment‐specific factors needs to be explicitly quantified.