MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2032470067 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0359

A simple method of dating marine growth circuli on scales of wild one sea-winter and two sea-winter Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>)

2013· article· en· W2032470067 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christopher Todd, Bryce D.M. Whyte, Julian C. MacLean, Crawford W. Revie, Nora Hanson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalmoFisheryEmigrationEcologyForagingFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental scienceGeographyBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method of dating the marine growth circuli on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) scales is presented. Data were available for 54 salmon, intercepted as smolts at the completion of their downstream migration in the River North Esk, Scotland. Smolts were tagged, released, and recaptured as return adults after either one (1SW) or two (2SW) winters at sea. Dating of circuli was achieved by fitting a simple quadratic model to the circuli pertaining to fixed points on the scale. For 1SW fish, the latter were the dates of river emigration and completion of marine migration, and the midpoint circulus (equal to the winter solstice) of the winter annulus. For 2SW salmon, these were the date of emigration and the two winter annulus midpoints. A key assumption is that winter annulus formation arises from constraints of light availability on foraging, and hence, reduced growth rate. Comparative analyses indicate the method to be robust and effectively transferable to salmon of known capture date — but of unknown smolt emigration date — by assuming a fixed date of emigration; in such cases, circuli could still be allocated with confidence to a calendar month.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→