MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029704808 · doi:10.1577/m06-003.1

Allometric Relationships between Size of Calcified Structures and Round Goby Total Length

2006· article· en· W2029704808 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jason P. Dietrich, Ana Carolina Taraborelli, Bruce J. Morrison, Ted Schaner

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityMinistry of Natural Resources and Forestry
FundersMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsNeogobiusRound gobyGobyAllometryMicropterusBiologyBass (fish)PerchPredationBayFisheryPredatorZoologyAnatomyFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Allometric relationships between calcified structures and total length of round goby Neogobius melanostomus were determined from a sample of fish ranging in total length from 53 to 152 mm. Each of the 10 allometric equations gave coefficients of determination (r2) that were greater than 0.80 and highly significant. The equations with the most predictive ability were those relating total length to cleithral, opercular, mouth, and pharyngeal bone measurements. Round goby remains were found in the stomachs of 10 predator species from the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario. Round goby were ingested most often by yellow perch Perca flavescens (40% of the stomachs examined) and largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (27%) and less frequently by other predators. Round goby calcified structures most frequently found in the stomachs of predators were mouth parts (premaxilla and dentary), pharyngeal bones (dentigerous plate and pharyngobranchial plates), and otoliths. The predictive equations, diagnostic features of calcified structures, and list of predatory species in this study may serve as helpful tools for future analyses of round goby predator diets.

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)0.003
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207