Genetically different Atlantic herring Clupea harengus spawning waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Putative spawning waves of Atlantic herring Clupea harengus were collected from 4 locations and genetically compared using 9 microsatellite loci.Shelf-scale (100s km) spatial differences were measured (max F ST = 0.01, p < 0.001) and 1 sub-annual temporal difference (F ST = 0.0058, p = 0.001) was revealed between spawning fish (predominantly comprising the same year-class) collected, 6 d apart, from the same location (Devastation Shoal, coastal Nova Scotia).Herring in the second spawning collection at Devastation Shoal had a greater average length-at-age within the year-class (t-test, p < 0.001).The genetic and morphometric differences between the Devastation Shoal collections are assumed to reflect a replacement period of spawning fish of approximately 6 d or less (at least at this location).We offer 3 explanations to account for the observations: (1) genetically distinct sympatric subpopulations or spawning waves;(2) sub-annual (d) genetic patchiness; and (3) transient use of spawning grounds which may indicate that the assumption of philopatry (natal spawning-site fidelity) in herring is invalid.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".