MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075010578 · doi:10.1577/t04-156.1

Modeling the Oxygen Consumption Rates in Pacific Salmon and Steelhead: Model Development

2005· article· en· W2075010578 on OpenAlexafffund
Marc Trudel, David W. Welch

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the American Fisheries Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans Canada
KeywordsOncorhynchusMetabolic rateFisheryEnvironmental scienceSalinityMetabolic costBiologyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We derived a series of models for estimating the standard metabolic rates, swimming costs, and total metabolic rates for sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka and steelhead O. mykiss. The performance of these models was compared statistically and used to predict optimal cruising speeds. These predictions were tested with independent estimates of swimming speed obtained under field conditions. Standard metabolic rates were correlated with body mass and temperature. Swimming costs were correlated with body mass and swimming speed, whereas total metabolic rates were correlated with body mass, water temperature, and swimming speed. Swimming costs were also correlated with temperature and salinity in steelhead but not in sockeye salmon. Regression models accounted for 94–99% of the variance in standard metabolic rates, swimming costs, and total metabolic rates. The oxygen consumption rate models we derived for sockeye salmon were inadequate for describing oxygen consumption in other species of Pacific salmon, Oncorhynchus spp., indicating that the practice of borrowing parameters from closely related species can induce serious biases in model predictions. The models derived in this study also produced realistic estimates of swimming speed in sockeye salmon but not in steelhead. The models derived in this study appear to be useful in estimating swimming speed and total metabolic rates of sockeye salmon in the field but are not appropriate predictors for other species of Pacific salmon.

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)0.004
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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations31
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the American Fisheries SocietySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207