MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1924755658 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2014-0137

Simulation and empirical analysis of novel sibship-based genetic determination of fish passage

2014· article· en· W1924755658 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrew R. Whiteley, Jason A. Coombs, Benjamin H. Letcher, Keith H. Nislow

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstU.S. Forest ServiceNational Institute of Food and AgricultureNew York State Department of Environmental ConservationU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsSalvelinusFish <Actinopterygii>TroutStatisticsComputer sciencePopulationMathematicsBiologyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop and test a new analytic approach, termed “sib-split”, to detect fish passage through road crossings. This new approach is based on the genetic analysis of full-siblings on opposite sides of potential barriers. We used simulations and data from two empirical case studies involving brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) movement with respect to barriers that varied in strength of effect on fish passage. Simulations revealed that both sib-split and the population assignment-based method (STRUCTURE) were highly accurate (mean accuracy > 99%) under easy-to-detect conditions (moderate to strong genetic differentiation and no movement). However, under difficult-to-detect simulated conditions (no genetic differentiation, 10% movement each generation), sib-split had higher accuracy (mean accuracy = 98%) than STRUCTURE (mean accuracy = 84%). Sib-split also outperformed STRUCTURE (mean accuracy 98% versus 89%) under a more difficult-to-detect simulated management scenario (simulated construction of a new complete barrier to movement). Sib-split provided more reliable and easily interpretable movement detection in both easy- and difficult-to-detect empirical case studies. With the empirical case studies, sensitivity to the prior on migration rate precluded use of STRUCTURE by itself, but a two-step approach where sib-split results were used to provide an informed migration prior for STRUCTURE provided additional information for both case studies.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→