Defining natal homing in marine fish populations: comment on Svedäng et al. (2007)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MEPS Marine Ecology Progress Series Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections MEPS 349:307-308 (2007) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07281 Defining natal homing in marine fish populations: comment on Svedäng et al. (2007) Ian R. Bradbury1,*, Benjamin J. Laurel2 1Marine Gene Probe Laboratory, Biology Department, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada 2National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Alaska Fisheries Science Center, Hatfield Marine Science Center, Newport, Oregon 97365, USA *Email: ibradbur@dal.ca ABSTRACT: The recent study by Svedäng et al. (2007; Mar Ecol Prog Ser 345:112) purports to have revealed explicit evidence of natal homing in Atlantic cod Gadus morhua, based on extensive archival tagging; the study, however, ignored the natal component of dispersal (i.e. the ichthyoplanktonic phase). The authors observed non-random directional movements in a context of small-scale genetic structure. Yet, in the absence of a linkage to natal habitats, we think that the authors have inappropriately interpreted their findings. Demonstrations of natal homing remain rare in marine species, due to logistical problems, and require assignment of spawning individuals on the basis of natal signatures, or the tracking of individuals from fertilization to spawning. KEY WORDS: Atlantic cod · Natal homing · Marine fish · Population structure · Philopatry Full text in pdf format PreviousNextCite this article as: Bradbury IR, Laurel BJ (2007) Defining natal homing in marine fish populations: comment on Svedäng et al. (2007). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 349:307-308. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07281 Export citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in MEPS Vol. 349. Online publication date: November 08, 2007 Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599 Copyright © 2007 Inter-Research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 teacher head, 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".