MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spawning behaviour and acoustic communication in Atlantic cod

2003· article· en· W2011660543 on OpenAlexaff
Sherrylynn Rowe, Jeffrey A. Hutchings

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMatingMating systemPopulationSperm competitionAtlantic codCompetition (biology)EcologyMate choiceReproductive successZoologyFishingSexual selectionFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mating systems are defined by the pattern of matings among individuals in a population, including the number of mates obtained by each female and male, and the duration of pair bonds. Within all mating systems, mate choice, intra‐sexual competition, and sperm competition may lead to variation in mating success among individuals. Growing evidence indicates that quantification of the patterns and processes of mating may be critical to understanding population dynamics. Atlantic cod had been fished for hundreds of years and was one of the most important commercial fish species worldwide until the recent collapse of many populations. Despite being of theoretical interest and practical importance, little was known about this species’ reproductive behaviour. Our research employed a quantitative approach to understand causes and consequences of variation in the mating system of Atlantic cod at the individual and population levels. We incorporated both detailed behavioural studies in the laboratory and observations of cod captured in the commercial fishery. Preliminary observations indicate tremendous variation in reproductive behaviour and mating success both within and between populations. Furthermore, variation in reproductive behaviour and mating success appears to be related to the ability of males to produce sound. Knowledge of Atlantic cod spawning behaviour will likely contribute to better understanding of population dynamics and improved ability to predict the impact of fishing on cod populations.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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