MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2062617748 · doi:10.1139/f10-048

Estimating bioenergetics model parameters for fish with incomplete recapture histories

2010· article· en· W2062617748 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bradley E. Thompson, Daniel B. Hayes

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrofishingEnvironmental scienceFisheryJuvenileJuvenile fishStatisticsBioenergeticsFish <Actinopterygii>Mark and recaptureOncorhynchusRainbow troutEcologyBiologyMathematicsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional methods for modeling growth of free-ranging fish are often limited by missing recapture observations that prevent individual growth estimates for a given time interval. Our purpose is to present a method for modeling growth rates of juvenile steelhead ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) that addresses this limitation. Age-1 juvenile steelhead were individually marked with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags, released in a Michigan, USA, watershed, and sampled monthly (May–November) with barge electrofishing. Individual growth was modeled using daily water temperature and observed fish sizes as inputs and by determining the proportion of maximum consumption parameter (P) for the bioenergetics equation that provided a minimum residual squared error. Results demonstrate that individual steelhead growth can be accurately modeled using water temperature and a temporally specific P shared by all individuals. Advantages of using this method to model fish growth include the ability to bridge data gaps where observations are lacking in individual length histories, rigorously test for differences in P across time periods, and estimate variability of P among fish within a given stream reach.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.208
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→