Biophysical modeling of larval Baltic cod (<i>Gadus morhua</i>) growth and survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A coupled hydrodynamictrophodynamic individual-based model of drift and feeding was utilized to analyze the intra- and inter-annual variability in growth and survival of cod (Gadus morhua) larvae in the central Baltic Sea. Highly temporally and spatially resolved simulated flow fields were used to investigate the potential drift of larval cod from the centre of spawning effort in the Bornholm Basin towards their nursery areas through temporally resolved three-dimensional idealized prey fields. Stomach content analyses of larval cod from the Bornholm Basin revealed calanoid copepod nauplii and early copepodite stages to be the preferred prey organisms. The results of the model runs indicate that larval cod changed from a nonlimited to a food-limited stage because of the strong decrease in abundance of the calanoid copepod Pseudocalanus elongatus during the last two decades. The modeling study revealed retention and dispersal from the main spawning ground to be a key process influencing larval survival. When P. elongatus was available in the prey fields, high cod larval survival rates occurred in spring and early summer. In contrast, when P. elongatus was not available, hatched larvae had only high survival probabilities later in the year or if they were transported into shallower coastal regions.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".