MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004532552 · doi:10.1577/m03-152.1

A New Incubator for the Assessment of Hatching and Emergence Success as Well as the Timing of Emergence in Salmonids

2005· article· en· W2004532552 on OpenAlexaff
Isabel Bernier‐Bourgault, François Guillemette, Charles Vallée, Pierre Magnan

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncubatorHatchingTroutSalvelinusIncubationSubstrate (aquarium)FisheryBiologyNest (protein structural motif)EcologyZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We devised a new incubator to estimate hatching and emergence success as well as the timing of emergence of brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis. The incubation basket is cylindrical and made of a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) grid that allows water to flow through from all directions. A fry trap is set on top of the incubation basket to catch the emergent larvae. A PVC coupler is fixed to the incubation basket and allows the fry trap to be easily removed and replaced so that one can sample larvae during emergence. In the field, the emergence success for incubators containing natural substrate ranged from 0% to 50%, compared with 0% to 77% for incubators that used Astroturf as a substrate. In the laboratory, the emergence success with Astroturf alone (75%) was comparable to that in the incubators that used Astroturf in the field (73%), suggesting that the incubator structure itself does not influence the survival of brook trout eggs. This incubator is easy to build and the materials needed for its construction are readily available. The collection of emergent larvae is easy and does not require additional equipment. Its advantages over other salmonid incubators are that it can resist adverse spring floods and freshets and it allows the assessment of emergence at various times in the field. This is important when determining the timing of emergence.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.259
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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