Larval sand lance (<i>Ammodytes</i> sp.) in the diet of small juvenile wolffish (<i>Anarhichas</i> spp.): predatory interactions in frontal water masses off western Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The predatory behaviour of two species of juvenile wolffish (Anarhichas lupus and Anarhichas minor) was studied during a field campaign across a frontal area off western Greenland. The study focused on ontogenetic changes in prey-type and -size preference of the wolffish and their predatory impact on a cohabiting population of larval sand lance (Ammodytes sp.). Sampling took place along a cross-shelf transect at latitude 66°20' N, and the analysis is based on stomach contents of assembled wolffish (25 cm in length) and abundance estimates of plankton and fish. An ontogenetic change in wolffish prey preference was evident as a dietary shift from copepods and smaller amphipods to larger amphipods and fish larvae. The inclusion of fish larvae in the wolffish diet led to a marked increase in prey biomass, and fish larvae constituted up to 77% of diet biomass in the largest juveniles caught. Wolffish selectively targeted the smaller-sized part of the larval sand lance population; hence, larval vulnerability increased with decreasing size. Comparison between estimated predation rates and abundances of predator and prey indicated larval predation mortalities of up to 5% per day, with mortality peaking in the vicinity of a hydrographic front. Hence, findings suggest substantial predation pressure on larvae, primarily related to larval size and distribution.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".