MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079829025 · doi:10.1002/aqc.763

<i>Probarbus jullieni</i> and <i>Probarbus labeamajor</i>: the management and conservation of two of the largest fish species in the Mekong River in southern Laos

2006· article· en· W2079829025 on OpenAlexaff
Ian G. Baird

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatch per unit effortIUCN Red ListFisheryFishingEndangered speciesGeographyThreatened speciesMekong riverStock (firearms)Structural basinEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Probarbus jullieni and Probarbus labeamajor are two of the largest carps in the Mekong River Basin, each reaching a maximum weight of about 70 kg. P. jullieni is listed in Appendix 1 of the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species, and both are listed on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, the first as ‘endangered’ and the second as ‘data deficient’. Six years of quantitative monitoring of a large‐meshed gill net fishery for Probarbus just below the Khone Falls in Khong district, Champasak province, in southern Laos shows that 78% of the overall catch is comprised of Probarbus, with P. jullieni making up 65% of landings. Over the 6‐year period catches of Probarbus declined significantly. However, catch‐per‐unit effort statistics do not indicate that the fishery is in decline, although fishers are convinced that real stock reductions are a large part of the reason for catch declines and decreases in fishing effort. A number of ecological and social factors are affecting the number and quality of gill nets in use, the length of fishing seasons, and gill net efficiency, making it difficult to compare catch‐per‐unit effort between years. There has been a shift from using large‐meshed gill nets for catching Probarbus to targeting smaller species using gill nets with smaller mesh‐sizes. This is an example of the ‘fishing down’ of a Mekong fish community, in which large long‐lived species are the first to be affected by heavy fishing pressure. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations43
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater EcosystemsSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207