Distinguishing trophic and habitat partitioning among sympatric populations of the estuarine fish<i>Osmerus mordax</i>Mitchill
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sympatric populations of rainbow smeltOsmerus mordaxof the St Lawrence middle estuary exhibited distinct morphologies suitable for exploiting either pelagic or benthic habitats in the absence of consistent morphological features related to specific diets. The magnitude of morphological differentiation was elevated and constant over 3 years even though statistically significant differences were observed among samples within populations. Both populations were spatially segregated in the estuary but some population mixing occurred at low densities of rainbow smelt. Diet analysis revealed that both populations opportunistically feed on large macrozooplankton. An amended version of Schoener'sDwas developed and used to compare the magnitude of niche overlap. It revealed that the diet of the middle estuary rainbow smelt differed according to the area where samples were collected but no differences existed between populations. The exploitation of ecologically distinct habitats appeared to be effective in maintaining morphologically distinct sympatric populations within an estuarine setting in the absence of diet differentiation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".