Age and Population Size Estimates of Overwintering Shortnose Sturgeon in the Saint John River, New Brunswick, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The densities and overall abundances of overwintering shortnose sturgeon Acipenser brevirostrum were estimated using underwater video at the Kennebecasis River overwintering site in 2009 and 2011. In 2009, underwater cameras coupled with lasers provided image‐based estimates of fish lengths (and therefore ages). The precision and accuracy of laser‐based measurements were estimated by laboratory experiments. In total, 362 and 222 overwintering shortnose sturgeon were counted in the 0.02‐km2 area during 2009 and 2011, respectively. The fork lengths of 83 overwintering shortnose sturgeon measured in 2009 ranged from 54 to 119 cm, corresponding to ages of 11–57 years (20.3 ± 7.9 years [mean ± SD]). Length measurement accuracy was highest (±10% fork length) when fish were positioned at 0 ± 30° or 180 ± 30° to the camera's lens. Three different models of spatial fish density estimated a total of 3,852–5,222 shortnose sturgeon in 2009 and 2011, similar to the 2005 local population estimate of 4,836 shortnose sturgeon. The consistent, high‐density aggregation of subadults and adults at this small site between 2005 and 2011 suggests that the site is important for protection of shortnose sturgeon in the Saint John River system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".