Did population collapse influence individual fecundity of Northwest Atlantic cod?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stares, J. C., Rideout, R. M., Morgan, M. J., and Brattey, J. 2007. Did population collapse influence individual fecundity of Northwest Atlantic cod? – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 64:1338 –1347. We examined the influence of population collapse on individual potential fecundity and total population egg production (TEP) of three northwest Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) populations: northern cod (Divisions 2J3KL), southern Grand Bank cod (NAFO Divisions 3NO), and southern Newfoundland cod (Subdivision 3Ps). Fecundity at length increased in conjunction with population collapse for two (3NO, 3Ps) of the three populations. Subsequent moderate population recovery between the 1990s and 2000s in 3Ps was accompanied by a decrease in fecundity at length. A large decrease in fecundity at length for 3NO during the same time period, despite little or no population recovery, coupled with the fact that there was no obvious difference in fish condition between the two time periods, suggested that density-independent factors could be contributing to the changes in fecundity. Use of pre-collapse fecundity–length relationships to estimate TEP in the post-collapse period resulted in underestimation of TEP by as much as 30% in 3NO and 46% in 3Ps, whereas in 2J3KL, TEP was overestimated by as much as 18%. Although the results do not fully support the hypothesis of an inverse relationship between population size and fecundity, they do demonstrate the variable nature of cod fecundity which, if not accounted for, can lead to erroneous perceptions of stock reproductive potential.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".