MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Management of the Nile perch, <i>Lates niloticus</i> fishery in Lake Victoria in light of the changes in its life history characteristics

2004· article· en· W2014234580 on OpenAlexfundno aff
R. Ogutu‐Ohwayo

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Ecology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Biodiversity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsLatesPerchPredationFisheryBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nile perch was introduced into lakes Victoria and Kyoga in the 1950s and 1960s from Lake Albert. The changes in prey eaten and the life history characteristics of Nile perch in lakes Victoria and Kyoga from the 1960s to 1990s were examined and compared with Lake Albert. The dominant prey eaten changed from haplochromines, Caridina nilotica, Rastrineobola argentea , and Nile perch juveniles. The condition factor deteriorated from 1.4 in 1960s to 1.2 in 1990s, compared with 1.3 in Lake Albert suggesting a reduction in food supply. Therefore, exploitation of Nile perch prey should be controlled. The size at first maturity increased from 30–40 to 40–50 cm and 50–59 to 80–100 cm for males and females, which is similar to Lake Albert. Sex ratios decreased from 85–100 to 20–65 females for every 100 males suggesting that Nile perch had less capacity to replenish its stocks such that breeding females should be protected. As males mature at 50–55 cm and females at 80–100 cm, immature males of &lt;50 cm and breeding females of &gt;100 cm could be protected through size selective exploitation of fish of 50–100 cm using gillnets of 127–254 mm.

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)0.000
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 score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations50
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of EcologySame topicAquatic Ecosystems and BiodiversityFrench-language works237,207