MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023496155 · doi:10.1577/m05-001.1

Bottlenecks to Fishery Yield for American Lobster in a Portion of the Gulf of St. Lawrence

2006· article· en· W2023496155 on OpenAlexaff
Robert J. Miller, Manon Mallet, Marc Lanteigne, Robert MacMillan

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomarusAmerican lobsterFisheryBenthic zoneLarvaStock (firearms)Yield (engineering)BiologyGeographyEcologyCrustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Egg production, larval survival, and migration of large benthic stages are considered to be possible bottlenecks to fishery yields for the American lobster Homarus americanus in the eastern Northumberland Strait, southern Gulf of St. Lawrence. Egg production, measured as eggs per trap haul and stage I larval production, was high compared with that of surrounding areas with greater fishery yield. The only area that could have supplied larvae by drift supported average egg production. Low levels of postlarvae developed from this average to high egg production, implicating low larval survival as the proximal cause of low fishery yield. A scarcity of small lobsters in the catch over several decades also indicated that recruitment was low and that the fishable stock was supported by immigration. Because of this spatially variable relationship between egg production and fishery yield, we recommend setting management targets specific to an area.

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 score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207