MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073326924 · doi:10.1139/f06-141

Hierarchical approach to the assessment of fishing effects on non-target chondrichthyans: case study of <i>Squalus megalops</i> in southeastern Australia

2006· article· en· W2073326924 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Matías Braccini, Bronwyn M. Gillanders, Terence I. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingFisheryOtterFisheries managementProductivityGeographyPopulationBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-levelled hierarchical risk assessment approach was trialed using piked spurdog (Squalus megalops) to evaluate the suitability of the approach for chondrichthyan species. At level 1, a qualitative assessment indicated that the only fishing-related activity to have moderate or high impact on S. megalops was "capture fishing" by otter trawl, Danish seine, gillnet, and automatic longline methods. At level 2, a semi-quantitative assessment ranked S. megalops at risk because of its low biological productivity and, possibly, its catch susceptibility from cumulative effects across the separate fishing methods. Finally, at level 3, a quantitative assessment showed that population growth is slow even under the assumption of density-dependent compensation where the fishing mortality rate equals the natural mortality rate. Although published information indicates that relative abundance has been stable in several regions of southern Australia, it is concluded that given its low biological productivity, changed fishing practices leading to increased fishing mortality could quickly put S. megalops at high risk. The hierarchical approach appears particularly useful for assessment of chondrichthyan species in data-limited fisheries. This approach allows for a management response at any level, optimizing research and management efforts by identifying and excluding low-risk species from data intensive assessments.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

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

Citations49
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207