MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Age and growth of the gulf toadfish<i>Opsanus beta</i>based on otolith increment analysis

2009· article· en· W2017931792 on OpenAlexaff
Estrella Malca, John F. Barimo, JE Serafy, Patrick J. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsToadfishOtolithBiologySexual dimorphismContext (archaeology)CourtshipBayBETA (programming language)ZoologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Oceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, sagittal otoliths of confirmed male and female specimens of the gulf toadfish Opsanus beta that were collected monthly over the course of a year from Biscayne Bay, Florida, U.S.A. were analysed. The timing and frequency of O. beta spawning seasons are reported by examination of the gonado-somatic index. The estimated ages of males and females ranged from <1 year to 6 and 5 years, respectively. Strong sexual dimorphism in growth was apparent with von Bertalanffy parameter estimates for males of Linfinity=393.8 mm, K=0.30, t0=0.36 and females of Linfinity=201.1 mm, K=0.79, t0=0.47. Comparison with previously published growth trajectories of the more northerly distributed conspecific Opsanus tau showed that O. beta males had a higher growth rate. Female O. beta and O. tau growth trajectories appear similar, with an indication that the former becomes asymptotic at least a year before the latter. Results are discussed in the context of temperature regimes, reproductive energy allocation and waste urea excretion in the two species.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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