MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1558189440 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v119i4.184

Body Size Distribution and Frequency of Anthropogenic Injuries of Bluntnose Sixgill Sharks, <em>Hexanchus griseus</em>, at Flora Islets, British Columbia

2005· article· en· W1558189440 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Robert L. Dunbrack, Robert Zielinski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsPopulationBiologyFisheryReefEcologyDemersal zoneMatingFishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bluntnose Sixgill Shark (Hexanchus griseus) is a widely distributed demersal species whose population biology is poorly understood. Although H. griseus is normally found in deep continental slope waters, individuals from a population in the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia, make unexpected diurnal movements onto a shallow reef (Flora Islets) between June and August. This shallow water activity allowed in situ length measurements to be made on 35 free-swimming Bluntnose Sixgill Sharks using stereo videography. The measured sharks were all large juveniles and sub-adults, although smaller juveniles and pregnant females are known to occur in deeper adjacent waters. The restricted size distribution at Flora Islets may arise because small juveniles avoid contact with larger conspecifics and mating takes place offshore. All measured sharks were individually identified by unique scar patterns. In 13 of 35 sharks these scars were consistent with injuries expected from hooking and entanglement by commercial fishing gear.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207