MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050412996 · doi:10.1139/f09-112

Otolith chemistry analyses indicate that water Sr:Ca is the primary factor influencing otolith Sr:Ca for freshwater and diadromous fish but not for marine fish

2009· article· en· W2050412996 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Randy J. Brown, Kenneth P. Severin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOtolithFish migrationFreshwater fishFisheryBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water chemistry is thought to be the primary factor influencing fish otolith chemistry. Experimental results with freshwater and diadromous fish have been consistent with this paradigm, but with marine fish, they have often been ambiguous or contradictory. A review of water chemistry data indicated that Sr:Ca (mmol:mol) levels were higher in marine water than in most freshwater systems and that Sr:Ca variability was lower in marine water than in most freshwater systems. We therefore hypothesized that lifetime otolith Sr:Ca profiles of freshwater fish would exhibit low levels of Sr:Ca with moderate variability, of diadromous fish would exhibit highly variable Sr:Ca levels, and of marine fish would exhibit high levels of Sr:Ca with low variability. Otolith Sr:Ca profiles from 81 species of freshwater, diadromous, and marine fish revealed that freshwater fish had low levels of Sr:Ca and lower variability than expected relative to marine fish, diadromous fish had Sr:Ca levels and variability that were consistent with expectations, and marine fish had high maximum Sr:Ca levels, as expected, and high Sr:Ca variability, similar in magnitude to diadromous fish, which was not expected. These findings indicate that water Sr:Ca is the primary factor influencing otolith Sr:Ca variation for freshwater and diadromous fish but not for marine fish.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations219
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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