MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1973937796 · doi:10.1139/f05-271

Long-term trends of bloater (<i>Coregonus hoyi</i>) recruitment in Lake Michigan: evidence for the effect of sex ratio

2006· article· en· W1973937796 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David B. Bunnell, Charles P. Madenjian, Thomas E. Croley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCisco Systems
KeywordsBiologyAlewifeSex ratioPopulationPredationEcologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term population trends are generally explained by factors extrinsic (e.g., climate, predation) rather than intrinsic (e.g., genetics, maternal effects) to the population. We sought to understand the long-term population dynamics of an important native Lake Michigan prey fish, the bloater Coregonus hoyi. Over a 38-year time series, three 10- to 15-year phases occurred (poor, excellent, and then poor recruitment) without high interannual variability within a particular phase. We used dynamic linear models to determine whether extrinsic (winter and spring temperature, alewife predator densities) or intrinsic factors (population egg production, adult condition, adult sex ratio) explained variation in recruitment. Models that included population egg production, sex ratio, winter and spring temperature, and adult bloater condition explained the most variation. Of these variables, sex ratio, which ranged from 47% to 97% female across the time series, consistently had the greatest effect: recruitment declined with female predominance. Including biomass of adult alewife predators in the models did not explain additional variation. Overall our results indicated that bloater recruitment is linked to its sex ratio, but understanding the underlying mechanisms will require additional efforts.

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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations49
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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