MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Predicting the vertical profiles of anchovy (<i>Engraulis mordax</i>) and sardine (<i>Sardinops sagax</i>) eggs in the California Current System

2006· article· en· W1975341332 on OpenAlexaff
K. Alexandra Curtis, David M. Checkley, Pierre Pepin

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Oceanography · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNorthwest Fisheries Science Center
KeywordsEngraulisAnchovySardinePelagic zoneStock assessmentOceanographyHydrographyEnvironmental scienceFisheryGeologyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Several published models exist for simulating vertical profiles of pelagic fish eggs, but no one has rigorously assessed their capacity to explain observed variability. In this study, we applied a steady‐state model, with four different formulations for vertical diffusivity, to northern anchovy ( Engraulis mordax ) and Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax ) eggs in the California Current region. Vertical mixing profiles, based on wind speed and hydrography, were combined with estimated terminal ascent velocities of the eggs based on measurements of egg buoyancy and size, to simulate the vertical profiles of the eggs. We evaluated model performance with two data sets: (1) vertically stratified tows for both species and (2) paired samples for sardine eggs from 3‐m depth and in vertically integrated tows. We used two criteria: whether the model predicted individual observed vertical profiles (1) as well as the observed mean and (2) better than the observed mean. Model predictions made with the formulation producing the most gradual profile of vertical diffusivity provided the best match to observations from both data sets and for both species. Addition of a random error term to the terminal ascent velocity further improved prediction for anchovy eggs, but not sardine. For the paired data, model prediction of integrated abundance from abundance at 3‐m depth had significantly lower mean square error than prediction based on a linear regression of 3 m on integrated abundance. Our results support the feasibility of using data from the Continuous Underway Fish Egg Sampler quantitatively as well as qualitatively in stock assessments.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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