Variation in the population biology of stripey bass Lutjanus carponotatus within and between two island groups on the Great Barrier Reef
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Density, population structure, mortality and growth of Lutjanus carponotatus on the Great Barrier Reef were compared on 2 spatial scales: between the Lizard and Palm Island groups and among 4 locations within the Palm group.The mean density at the Palm group was approximately 7 times that of the Lizard group.There were 2-fold differences in density within the Palm group, but strong statistical signals were not detected due to high variability in the data.Differences in size structures and asymptotic body sizes between the island groups were pronounced, and smaller differences were also evident within the Palm group.While age structures were similar among Palm group locations and lacked anomalous peaks, a series of strong cohorts at older age classes at the Lizard group suggests greater recruitment variability there during the past 2 decades.Variability in mortality did not increase with scale, as larger differences existed within the Palm group than between it and the Lizard group.The population traits estimated in this study were used in conjunction with reef area data to generate estimates of abundance and biomass, the values of which illustrate how multiple population traits interact to ultimately determine population size and reproductive potential.Multi-scale studies that examine a variety of aspects of population biology are rare for large reef fish, but are needed to identify which traits are likely to exhibit variation on which spatial scales.
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".