MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of tag data to compare growth rates of Atlantic coast striped bass stocks

2003· article· en· W2085636683 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stuart A. Welsh, Andrew Kahnle, Beth A. Versak, Robert J. Latour

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Management and Ecology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAtlantic States Marine Fisheries CommissionNew York State Department of Environmental ConservationNew Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
KeywordsBass (fish)Morone saxatilisFisheryStock (firearms)Abiotic componentStock assessmentGeographyBiologyEcologyFishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Migratory stocks of Atlantic coast striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum), range primarily from North Carolina (NC) northward to Canadian waters. Between 1986 and 2000, 267 045 wild striped bass were tagged and released from NC to Massachusetts as part of the Cooperative Striped Bass Tagging Program. Direct measurements of growth of individual fish can be obtained from tag data and are useful for understanding the dynamics of fish populations. Growth rates from regressions of length‐increment vs. time‐at‐liberty were estimated for striped bass tagged and released in three southern states [NC, Virginia (VA) and Maryland (MD)] and three northern states (New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island). Striped bass tagged in waters of northern states grew faster (significantly steeper regression slopes) than those tagged in southern areas. Migratory patterns, stock mixing, and unmeasured biotic and abiotic influences on growth precluded conclusions that observed growth patterns are stock‐specific. These results, however, indicate latitudinal differences in growth rates, and should be considered in future research and management of Atlantic coast striped bass.

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 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 score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Management and EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207