MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088033508 · doi:10.3354/meps08667

Modeling the spatial autocorrelation of pelagic fish abundance

2010· article· en· W2088033508 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin M. Kleisner, JF Walter, Sandra L. Diamond, David J. Die

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Ecology Progress Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies, University of MiamiNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsPelagic zoneSwordfishFisheryYellowfin tunaThunnusFishingGeographyOceanographyMiamiTunaSpatial analysisAbundance (ecology)EcologyEnvironmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between pelagic fish and ocean temperature is cited in many studies, the majority of which investigate correlations of pelagic species and sea surface temperatures (SST). While appropriate for surface-associated species, this may not be accurate for deep-diving fishes. A different way to examine this relationship is to model spatial autocorrelation of fish species and temperatures at an appropriate range of depths. Spatial autocorrelation, the distance at which data are interdependent, is a potential descriptor of the patch size of an organism. Here we modeled spatial autocorrelation for 5 pelagic species that inhabit different depths in the Gulf of Mexico: dolphinfish Coryphaena hippurus, wahoo Acanthocybium solandri, yellowfin tuna Thunnus albacares, swordfish Xiphias gladius, and bigeye tuna Thunnus obesus. Additionally, we modeled spatial autocorrelation for ocean temperatures at the surface, at 200, and 400 m. We hypothesized that autocorrelation distances will be greater for deeper water temperatures and for species that live at deeper depths due to greater homogeneity of deep waters over greater spatial ranges. Results show average distances of autocorrelation on the order of 55 to 60 km for wahoo and dolphinfish, 90 km for yellowfin tuna, and 135 to 145 km for swordfish and bigeye tuna; the same data for temperature were 75, 135, and 300 km for SST, and at 200 and 400 m depth, respectively. Autocorrelation distances of dolphinfish, wahoo, and yellowfin were correlated with that of of SST, while the autocorrelation distance of swordfish and bigeye were correlated with that of temperatures at 200 m. Results suggest that autocorrelation distances may be useful as a proxy for habitat delineation.

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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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 head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations30
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Ecology Progress SeriesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207