MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of otolith analyses to investigate broad size distributions of young yellow perch in temperate lakes

2001· article· en· W1970269745 on OpenAlexaff
Dean G. Fitzgerald, Alec Reid. Dale, Michael V. Thomas, Peter F. Sale

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerchOtolithBiologyTemperate climateFisheryPredationForagingSeasonalityEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Otolith analyses were used to back‐calculate young‐of‐the‐year (YOY) yellow perch Perca flavescens hatch‐date estimates to interpret broad length distributions observed within a small Great Lake, Lake St. Clair, and a small inland lake, Lake Opinicon, during 1998. For the Great Lake, the earliest observed hatch date occurred 2 weeks after suitable water temperatures and latest hatch dates occurred the same week temperatures were considered too warm for spawning. For the inland lake, the earliest hatch date occurred 4 weeks after suitable water temperatures and the latest hatch dates occurred 2 weeks after the water temperatures were considered too warm for spawning. It is inferred that spawning in each lake had a duration of >9 weeks. This suggests that natural perch populations can protract their spawning season opportunistically under the appropriate environmental cues. During 1998, these cues involved a shortened winter, earlier spring, and slow warming to typical summer temperatures, caused by the El Niño‐Southern Oscillation. Time of YOY hatch determined the absolute opportunity for growth and resulted in a match or mismatch with optimal foraging conditions and contributed to the development of the observed YOY length distributions.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations14
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207