MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sexual maturity cycle and spawning of Greenland halibut <i>Reinhardtius hippoglossoides</i> in the Davis Strait

2010· article· en· W2072448818 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Agnes C. Gundersen, Claus Stenberg, Inge Fossen, B. Lyberth, Jesper Boje, Ole A Jørgensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHalibutBiologySexual maturityFisheryCondition indexSex ratioReproductive biologyPleuronectidaeAnimal scienceFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyFlounderDemographyPopulationEmbryoEmbryogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Female sexual maturation cycle and the main spawning time of Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides in the Davis Strait were studied through regularly collected samples during 1 year starting in spring 2003. Samples were collected from the southern slope of the Davis Strait Ridge between Canada and Greenland in the depth range 1000-1500 m. Female sexual maturation was described using different approaches: gonado-somatic index, visual macroscopic maturity stage index, histological microscopic maturity index and oocyte diameter measurements. A significant increase in the gonado-somatic index was seen from September onwards until February with a maximum estimated value of 18%. The proportion of mature fish increased from December until March. At the same time, the proportion of females with a low gonado-somatic index also increased from February, indicating that spawning had occurred and females were recovering. Oocyte diameter distribution revealed a leading cohort development during autumn through to December to February. A coupling between sexual maturity and fish condition was seen for females in maturing condition indicating a steady build up of stored energy in the liver from June to November.

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)0.000
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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207