MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1912158514 · doi:10.1111/jfb.12157

Anguillids: conserving a global fishery<sup>a</sup>

2013· article· en· W1912158514 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Righton, Alan Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyAnguilla rostrataGlobeSustainabilityFisheryTemperate climateEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concern has increased in recent years over the sustainability of anguillid populations worldwide in the face of sustained consumer demand. This is as true of the more numerous tropical species as it is for the better known temperate species. There are, however, critical gaps in knowledge of anguillid biology and ecology, and these hold back measures designed to conserve and enhance anguillid populations, including aquaculture. Developing a more integrated understanding of anguillid biology, and resolving challenges faced by stakeholders and policy makers, is now more urgent than ever. World experts from Japan, the U.S.A., Canada, the European Union and New Zealand led a 3 day event where >200 scientists drawn from >30 countries across the globe converged to share their experience and expert knowledge of anguillids. The session covered the full range of issues affecting anguillid stocks across the globe, and also highlighted advances in the understanding of fundamental aspects of anguillid biology. Overall, 49 oral presentations and 68 posters were presented and, while these were dominated by Anguilla anguilla, Anguilla rostrata and Anguilla japonica, a further eight anguillid species were represented. What was experienced by all was the facilitation of a more integrated understanding of anguillid biology, and how this understanding can interface with the challenges faced by fishermen, consumers, engineers, producers and managers. The highlights are reviewed, important trends in anguillid stocks and research identified and the consensus for future science and management direction reported.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.010

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations16
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207