MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998968918 · doi:10.1577/m08-107.1

Implications of Recreational Fishing on Juvenile Masu Salmon Stocked in a Hokkaido River

2009· article· en· W1998968918 on OpenAlexaff
Yasuyuki Miyakoshi, Yoshitaka Sasaki, Makoto Fujiwara, Keiko Tanaka, Naokazu Matsueda, James R. Irvine, Shuichi Kitada

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFisheryOncorhynchusJuvenileStockingFishingTributaryRecreational fishingOverwinteringCatch and releaseHatcheryFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Freshwater recreational anglers in northern Japan sometimes catch significant numbers of juvenile masu salmon Oncorhynchus masou, thereby reducing the effectiveness of enhancement activities aimed at increasing marine catches of adult masu salmon. We stocked 66,500 juvenile masu salmon in the Shirai River, a major tributary of the Yoichi River in Hokkaido, northern Japan, during October 2005. Surveys conducted during the month after stocking revealed that approximately 65 fish/angler-day were caught, and catch varied between fishing gears (bait or fly) and locations (upper or lower reach). Estimated total number (mean ± SE) of fish harvested was 5,647 ± 2,394, equivalent to 8.5 ± 3.6% of the fish stocked. The estimated number of fish remaining in the river at the end of the angler survey was 57,246 ± 8,595, and survival rate during this month was 86.1 ± 12.9%. While releasing hatchery-reared masu salmon in late fall can reduce fishing mortality in rivers compared with earlier releases, mortality could be further reduced by dispersing fish over large areas that contain locations with suitable overwintering habitat.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.219
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207