The spatial scale of phase synchrony in winter flounder (<i>Pseudopleuronectes americanus</i>) production increased among southern New England nurseries in the 1990s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The spatial scales at which the dynamics of subpopulations are synchronized affect regional population persistence and reflect the operational spatial scales of factors regulating populations. I examined phase synchrony in the fluctuations of age-0 winter flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus) production among 19 southern New England (SNE), USA, coastal nurseries. From 1990 to 2004, nursery production was synchronized at scales up to ~200 km based on spatial trends in cross-correlations of first-differenced age-0 abundance time series. However, sliding window analysis of 1975–2005 time series collected in six nurseries ≤55 km apart in northern SNE indicated that synchrony increased from low to high values in the early 1990s. Synchrony in production also increased among three nurseries ≤65 km apart in southern SNE from 1984 to 2004. Thus, interannual fluctuations in nursery production appeared to become synchronized at coarser spatial scales throughout SNE during the 1990s. This coarsening of the spatial scale of control of winter flounder nursery production was coincident with an increase in the frequency of springs with warm temperatures believed to negatively affect early life history processes. Spatial synchronization of winter flounder nursery ground production could destabilize the age-class structure and population dynamics in the region.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".