MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1824116934 · doi:10.1080/03632415.2015.1074570

Fish Out of Water: How Much Air is Too Much?

2015· article· en· W1824116934 on OpenAlexaff
Katrina V. Cook, Robert J. Lennox, Scott G. Hinch, Steven J. Cooke

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Exposing fish to air following capture influences postrelease survival and behavior. Air exposure causes acute hypoxia and physical damage to the gill lamellae, resulting in physiological stress and physical damage that increases with air exposure duration. Air exposure duration is a relevant and easily quantified metric for both fishers and managers and can therefore provide a definitive benchmark for improving postrelease survival. Yet, fishers are rarely provided with specific recommendations other than simply to “minimize” air exposure. This is a subjective recommendation, potentially causing confusion and noncompliance. Here we discuss and summarize the literature regarding air exposure thresholds in both commercial and recreational fisheries, the factors influencing these thresholds, and identify knowledge gaps limiting our understanding of tolerance to air exposure in captured fish. Exponer a los peces al aire tras ser capturados influencia su supervivencia y comportamiento a la hora de liberarlos. La exposición al aire causa hipoxia aguda y maltrata las lamelas de las branquias, lo que resulta en estrés fisiológico y daño físico, el cual se incrementa a medida que se expone el pez al aire por más tiempo. La duración de la exposición al aire es una medida relevante y fácil de cuantificar tanto para los pescadores como para los manejadores y, por lo tanto, brinda un punto de referencia para mejorar la supervivencia tras la liberación. Aun así, a los pescadores rara vez se les dan recomendaciones específicas que van más allá de “minimizar” la exposición de los peces. Esta es una recomendación subjetiva que potencialmente causa confusión y no se acata. Aquí se discute y resume la literatura referente a los límites de exposición al aire tanto en pesquerías comerciales como recreativas, los factores que afectan esos límites y se identifican huecos del conocimiento que limitan el entendimiento de la tolerancia de los peces capturados cuando se les expone al aire. Exposer les poissons à l'air après leur capture influe sur la survie et le comportement après remise à l'eau. L'exposition à l'air provoque une hypoxie aiguë et des dommages physiques aux lamelles des branchies, ce qui entraîne un stress physiologique et des dommages physiques qui augmentent avec la durée d'exposition à l'air. La durée d'exposition à l'air est une mesure pertinente et facilement quantifiée pour les pêcheurs et les gestionnaires et peut donc constituer une référence définitive pour l'amélioration de la survie après remise à l'eau. Pourtant, les pêcheurs reçoivent rarement des recommandations spécifiques autres que de simplement « minimiser » l'exposition à l'air. Cette recommandation est subjective, et peut semer la confusion et conduire à la non-conformité. Ici, nous discutons et faisons le point sur la documentation concernant les seuils d'exposition à l'air à la fois pour la pêche commerciale et la pêche récréative, les facteurs influençant ces seuils, et identifions les lacunes dans les connaissances qui limitent notre compréhension de la tolérance à l'exposition de l'air chez les poissons capturés.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations166
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheriesSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207