MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010326465 · doi:10.1651/s-2764.1

Early Life History and a Modeling Framework for Lobster (Homarus Americanus) Populations in the Gulf of Maine

2006· article· en· W2010326465 on OpenAlexaff
L. S. Incze, Richard A. Wahle, Nicholas H. Wolff, Peter Lawton, Robert S. Steneck, Yong Chen, Christopher Wilson, Huijie Xue, Eric R. Annis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Crustacean Biology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomarusAmerican lobsterPelagic zoneAbundance (ecology)FisheryBiologyBayPopulationEcologyPredationPlanktonOceanographyCrustaceanDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beginning in the late 1980s, lobster (Homarus americanus) landings for the state of Maine and the Bay of Fundy increased to levels more than three times their previous 20-year means. Reduced predation may have permitted the expansion of lobsters into previously inhospitable territory, but we argue that in this region the spatial patterns of recruitment and the abundance of lobsters are substantially driven by events governing the earliest life history stages, including the abundance and distribution of planktonic stages and their initial settlement as Young-of-Year (YOY) lobsters. Settlement densities appear to be strongly driven by abundance of the pelagic postlarvae. Postlarvae and YOY show large-scale spatial patterns commensurate with coastal circulation, but also multi-year trends in abundance and abrupt shifts in abundance and spatial patterns that signal strong environmental forcing. The extent of the coastal shelf that defines the initial settlement grounds for lobsters is important to future population modeling. We address one part of this definition by examining patterns of settlement with depth, and discuss a modeling framework for the full life history of lobsters in the Gulf of Maine.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations32
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Crustacean BiologySame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207