MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076219186 · doi:10.3109/19401736.2010.526112

Applying genetic techniques to study remote shark fisheries in northeastern Madagascar

2011· article· en· W2076219186 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMitochondrial DNA · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFisheryCarcharhinusBayEndangered speciesFishingBycatchChondrichthyesBiologyDNA barcodingMarine protected areaGeographyEcologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The shark fisheries of Madagascar remain largely unstudied. Remoteness makes fisheries monitoring challenging while the high value of shark fins combined with the extreme poverty in Madagascar creates intensive pressure on shark resources. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We use DNA barcoding and species-specific PCR assays to characterize shark fisheries in Antongil Bay in northeastern Madagascar. RESULTS: The 239 samples taken from individuals collected in 2001 and 2002 correspond to 19 species. The four most common species were Sphyrna lewini, Rhizoprionodon acutus, Carcharhinus brevipinna, and C. sorrah. Antongil Bay may be a breeding area for C. brevipinna, C. leucas, and S. lewini. CONCLUSION: Local names are generally not a useful proxy for monitoring the species harvested in the fishery. Conservation efforts should characterize species exploitation at present, create spatial and temporal fishing restrictions to protect endangered species, and restrict large mesh gillnets.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.210 · 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