Predator‐prey interactions of American lobster <i>(Homarus americanus)</i> in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Between 1999 and 2006, predator‐prey interactions of American lobster (Homarus americanus) in Northumberland Strait, Canada, and adjacent waters were evaluated from analysis of over 28 000 stomachs from 11 species of demersal fish, 5 species of pelagic fish, and 3 species of large decapod crustaceans. Predation on planktonic stages of lobster was rare and predation upon benthic stages of lobster was uncommon, principally restricted to shorthorn sculpin (Myoxocephalus scorpius) and cannibalism (during the moult). The diet of American lobster ≥40 mm carapace length during July‐August consisted of rock crab (Cancer irroratus , 45–68% of prey biomass, of which c. 30% was moulted carapaces), small sea stars, and lobsters (0.7–12.9% of prey biomass, of which 70% was moulted carapaces). Molluscs, polychaetes, and fish remains (mainly bones and scales) each did not exceed 7.5% of prey biomass. A minimum of 35% of the lobster prey biomass was attributable to scavenging. With an average abundance of 7.6 kg ha‐1, lobsters were the dominant demersal species captured in the study area. Lobsters largely avoided water >30 m deep and <6°C, and mud or muddy‐sand substrates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".