MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044020719 · doi:10.1139/f00-096

European eel (<i>Anguilla anguilla</i>): prediction of spawner escapement from continental population parameters

2000· article· en· W2044020719 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Éric Feunteun, Anthony Acou, Pascal Laffaille, A. Legault

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReproductive biology and impacts on aquatic species
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEscapementElectrofishingFisheryAnguillidaePopulationOtolithDrainage basinAnguilla rostrataEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)BiologyGeographyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the assessment of silver European eel (Anguilla anguilla) escapement based on a "sedentary" population fraction analysis in a 60-km 2 watershed of northern Brittany (France). Downstream migration fluxes were monitored using eel traps and related to environmental factors. Intensive electrofishing and fyke-net fishing were conducted to assess eel biomass, densities, and population structure. A total of 564 eels, including 81 silver eels, were PIT tagged. In 1996, 616 eels were caught in the catchment including 68 silver eels (11%). During the following downstream migration period, 12 of the PIT-tagged silver eels, among a total of 678, were recaptured in the downstream traps. Seven were recaptured in the catchment in 1997. It was shown that (i) only about 20% of the silver eels present in the catchment emigrated during the following year, (ii) 12% stayed in the catchment including two (3.4%) that recovered yellow eel characteristics, and (iii) the other eels either died or settled in the catchment but were not recaptured. It was also estimated that 2% (650 eels) of the population (34 000 eels) among 3000 silver eels considered "emigration candidates" emigrated each year,.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations97
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicReproductive biology and impacts on aquatic speciesFrench-language works237,207