MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027113424 · doi:10.3354/esr00192

Movement patterns of goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara around southeast Cuba: implications for conservation

2009· article· en· W2027113424 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fabián Pina-Amargós, Gaspar González-Sansón

Bibliographic record

VenueEndangered Species Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia, Tecnología y Medio AmbienteInternational Council for Canadian Studies
KeywordsGrouperFisheryGeographyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara is the largest grouper in the western hemisphere. Recently, populations have experienced dramatic declines that have become a major cause of concern for scientists and conservationists. It is essential for conservationists and managers to understand the species' movement patterns if marine protected areas are to be effectively designed. We present results of goliath grouper movements following conventional tagging within and adjacent to the Jardines de la Reina Archipelago, which includes the Caribbean's largest marine reserve. Five individuals were tagged in 2001 and tracked until 2003, with 541 underwater resightings through summer 2002 at the tagging sites. No goliath grouper were resighted after July 2002 at Jardines de la Reina diving sites. In February 2002, 1 individual was caught 36 km northeast of the tagging site. In August 2002, a second tagged specimen was caught 77 km southeast of the tagging site, while in August 2003, 2 individuals were captured 168 km southeast of the tagging site, at a possible spawning aggregation site. All recaptures took place outside reserve boundaries. We assess these findings and their implications for goliath grouper conservation in Cuba.

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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEndangered Species ResearchSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207