MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A MODEL OF CHINOOK SALMON POPULATION DYNAMICS INCORPORATING SIZE‐SELECTIVE EXPLOITATION AND INHERITANCE OF POLYGENIC CORRELATED TRAITS

2010· article· en· W1907395388 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jeffrey F. Bromaghin, Ryan M. Nielson, Jeffrey J. Hard

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Resource Modeling · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaAlaska Department of Fish and GameNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationSimon Fraser UniversityU.S. Department of Commerce
KeywordsChinook windPopulationFisheryHeritabilityBiologyPopulation sizeSelection (genetic algorithm)Fisheries managementFish <Actinopterygii>FecundityEffective population sizeEcologyOncorhynchusEvolutionary biologyFishingComputer scienceDemographyMachine learningGenetic variation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractConcern regarding the potential for selective fisheries to degrade desirable characteristics of exploited fish populations is growing worldwide. Although the occurrence of fishery‐induced evolution in a wild population has not been irrefutably documented, considerable theoretical and empirical evidence for that possibility exists. Environmental conditions influence survival and growth in many species and may mask comparatively subtle trends induced by selective exploitation, especially given the evolutionarily short time series of data available from many fisheries. Modeling may be the most efficient investigative tool under such conditions. Motivated by public concern that large‐mesh gillnet fisheries may be altering Chinook salmon in western Alaska, we constructed a stochastic model of the population dynamics of Chinook salmon. The model contained several individually based components and incorporated size‐selective exploitation, assortative mating, size‐dependent female fecundity, density‐dependent survival, and the heritability of size and age. Substantial reductions in mean size and age were observed under all scenarios. Concurrently reducing directional selection and increasing spawning abundance was most effective in stimulating population recovery. Use of this model has potential to improve our ability to investigate the consequences of selective exploitation and aid development of improved management strategies to more effectively sustain fish and fisheries into the future.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.123

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural Resource ModelingSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207