Homing and group cohesion in Atlantic cod <i>Gadus morhua</i> revealed by tagging experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homing behaviour and group cohesion in Atlantic cod Gadus morhua from the northern Gulf of St Lawrence were studied based on tagging-recapture data from two periods, the 1980s and a recent period from 1996 to 2008. Two or more tags from a single tagging experiment were frequently recovered together in subsequent years. The null hypothesis was tested that the frequency of matching tag recoveries occurred by chance only through random mixing of tagged G. morhua before their recapture by the commercial fishery. The alternative hypothesis was that non-random, positive association (group cohesion) existed among tagged individuals that persisted through time and during migrations. Results show that the G. morhua population exhibits a homing behaviour, with temporal stability across seasons and years: 50% of recaptured fish in the recent period were caught <34 km from their mark site, even 3 years after release. In the 1980s, G. morhua were located at <10 km from their release site 1 year after tagging during summer and at <16 km during spring and autumn combined. Despite the increasing distance between the mark and recapture sites over time, the difference was not significant. In addition, occurrences of two or more tagged fish from the same release event that were caught together indicated a non-random association among individual fish for periods of one to several years and through migrations over several hundred kilometres. Hence G. morhua showed group cohesion in addition to site fidelity. These two interacting behaviours may be fundamental for the rebuilding and conservation of depleted fish 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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".