MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074915261 · doi:10.1577/t06-062.1

Estimation of Potential Impacts from Offshore Liquefied Natural Gas Terminals on Red Snapper and Red Drum Fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico: An Alternative Approach

2007· article· en· W2074915261 on OpenAlexaff
Benny J. Gallaway, William J. Gazey, John G. Cole, Robert G. Fechhelm

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the American Fisheries Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsCamosun College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFisheryEnvironmental scienceCoast guardLiquefied natural gasEntrainment (biomusicology)DrumSubmarine pipelineGallon (US)Stock (firearms)OceanographyNatural gasEcologyEnvironmental protectionEngineeringBiologyGeographyWaste managementGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As of October 1, 2005, seven offshore liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals have been proposed to be sited in offshore waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Six of these facilities have opted to use open‐rack vaporizers (ORVs) to heat and regasify the LNG and one plans to use a combination open‐closed‐loop system. Each of the terminals would require on the order of 100‐200 million gallons (380‐760 × 106 L) of seawater per day to vaporize the LNG. The potential impact on fishery stocks resulting from the entrainment of fish eggs and larvae has emerged as the foremost issue associated with the LNG terminals. The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and the Maritime Administration (MARAD) have used forward‐projecting equivalent adult models (EAMs) to evaluate the expected levels of impacts from entrainment and have concluded that the effects, while adverse, are minor. The results of these analyses have, however, predicted losses of a magnitude that have been interpreted by resource managers to represent significant reductions in important, overfished stocks of red drum Sciaenops ocellatus and red snapper Lutjanus campechanus. In this paper we show that the forward‐projecting EAMs are probably inappropriate and describe a fecundity hindcasting approach that is used in conjunction with the existing stock assessment models to estimate the impacts of entrainment on stocks and yields. The results of these analyses suggest that the effects on red drum yields are 387‐fold lower than the impacts on red drum yield estimated by the USCG and MARAD using the forward‐projecting EAM. For red snapper the impacts on yield using the fecundity hindcasting approach are 19‐fold lower than the effects estimated by the USCG and MARAD using the forward‐projecting approach. If our estimates are correct, the proposed LNG terminals will have minor adverse impacts on the subject stocks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the American Fisheries SocietySame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207