Predator-mediated habitat use by juvenile white hake (Urophycis tenuis) and Greenland cod (Gadus ogac)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juvenile white hake (Urophycis tenuis) abundance has been increasing on the northeast coast of Newfoundland over the past two decades. In these coastal areas juvenile white hake and Greenland cod (Gadus ogac) overlap spatially and temporally in eelgrass (Zostera marina) habitat, an important nursery for young of the year gadids. Concern has arisen that the recent increase in white hake abundance may be negatively impacting other gadids, such as Greenland cod. The purpose of my study was, therefore, to investigate the habitat use and behavioural interactions of juvenile white hake and Greenland cod and how this may vary in response to predator threat (an age 3+ Atlantic cod; G. morhua) and interspecific competition. A series of laboratory experiments were undertaken to determine habitat use under these different scenarios by dividing the bottom of two replicate arenas (2 x 2 x 0.5 m) into thirds and covering these with artificial eelgrass, cobble, or sand. My study documented overlapping habitat use by juvenile white hake and Greenland cod and supported the contention that eelgrass serves as an important refuge habitat for both species, with Greenland cod showing the highest affinity. Furthermore, interspecific competition experiments showed evidence of white hake excluding Greenland cod from preferred habitat as a result of competition for refuges. The size advantage that white hake gain over Greenland cod early during demersal life may be the main mechanism that influences the outcome of this habitat competition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".