MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reproductive biology of the dolphin fish Corphaena hippurus on the east coast of Taiwan

2001· article· en· W1964560792 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chuen-Chi Wu, Wei-Cheng Su, Tsuyoshi Kawasaki

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTerry Fox Research InstituteAcademia SinicaNational Science Council
KeywordsFecundityBiologyFisherySexual maturityFish <Actinopterygii>Sex ratioOvaryReproductive biologyEast coastZoologyAnimal scienceEcologyPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dolphin fish, Corphaena hippurus Linnaeus, is one of the most important migratory fishes on the east coast of Taiwan.Present results are based on an investigation of 1439 specimens caught using long-line and driftnet, and set net collected monthly between September 1996 and September 1997.The sex ratio of female to male and female combined was 65%, demonstrating a female predominance.Oocytes became mature and transparent when they attained 1.0 mm in diameter.The total number of oocytes per ovary was estimated to range from 2.78 ¥ 10 5 to 23.48 ¥ 10 5 , but batch fecundity was noticeably lower than the total number of ovarian eggs, ranging 5.3-32.7%(average 30.1%), and the relative fecundity ranging 10-344/g bodyweight (mean 111/g bodyweight).Minimum body size at sexual maturity was estimated to be 51 cm for both sexes.Dolphin fish spawned throughout the year with reproductive activity peaking in February to March.It is suggested that the dolphin fish has an extended spawning season, during which it lays eggs almost continuously.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations43
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries ScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207