MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044832688 · doi:10.1139/f01-053

Effects of experimental otter trawling on the macrofauna of a sandy bottom ecosystem on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland

2001· article· en· W2044832688 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Elr Kenchington, Jens Prena, Kent Gilkinson, Donald C. Gordon, Kevin G. MacIsaac, C Bourbonnais, Peter Schwinghamer, Terence W. Rowell, D.L. McKeown, W. Peter Vass

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsTrawlingBottom trawlingAbundance (ecology)FisheryBiomass (ecology)EcologyBenthic zonePolychaeteSpecies richnessBiologyEnvironmental scienceFishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 3-year otter trawling experiment was conducted on a deepwater (120–146 m) sandy bottom ecosystem on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland that had not experienced trawling for at least 12 years. The benthic macrofauna were sampled before and after trawling and in reference areas. The 200 grab samples collected contained 246 taxa, primarily polychaetes, crustaceans, echinoderms, and molluscs. Biomass was dominated by propeller clams (Cyrtodaria siliqua) and sand dollars (Echinarachnius parma), while abundance was dominated by the polychaete Prionospio steenstrupi and the mollusc Macoma calcarea. The most prominent feature of the data was a natural decline in the total number of species, the total abundance, and the abundance and biomass of selected species between 1993 and 1995. The only immediate effect of trawling was seen in 1994 when the abundance of 13 species, the biomass of 11 species (mostly polychaetes), and the total abundance per grab were significantly lower. There was little evidence of long-term trawling effects. When trawling disturbance was indicated, it appeared to mimic natural disturbance, shifting the community in the same direction in multidimensional scaling ordination; no distinctive trawling signature was observed. However, the results of this experiment should not be uncritically extrapolated to the impacts of commercial trawling.

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)0.001
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 score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations57
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207