MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2088710657 · doi:10.1080/00028487.2013.862178

Determinate Versus Indeterminate Fecundity in American Shad, an Anadromous Clupeid

2014· article· en· W2088710657 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Reid Hyle, Richard S. McBride, John E. Olney

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the American Fisheries Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFecundityBiologyFisheryPopulationAlosaZoologyFish migrationFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Historical fecundity estimates of American Shad Alosa sapidissima used a determinate method that estimated annual fecundity as the standing stock of oocytes at a single point of time prior to spawning. Such fecundity estimates have been (1) reported for populations from the Canadian Maritimes to Florida, (2) applied to hypothesis tests of life history evolution, and (3) used in demographic models to advise management policy. However, American Shad have asynchronous development of yolked oocyte clutches, which suggests that new oocytes could arise after spawning commences, biasing the results of a determinate fecundity method downward. If so, annual fecundity should be a product of batch size and the number of batches—an indeterminate fecundity method. We investigated oocyte recruitment, atresia, and spawning intervals using gonad histology of females from the Mattaponi River, Virginia. Batch size (i.e., the number of hydrated oocytes prior to a spawning event) was estimated using a gravimetric method. Spawning duration was obtained from an independent acoustic tagging study. A size hiatus between primary and secondary oocytes was only evident in some individuals during spawning, so we conclude that an indeterminate fecundity method is necessary for this population of American Shad. Atresia was evident during spawning but was low at the end of the 2002 spawning season. Females spawned every 2.2–2.9 d, releasing 11–17 batches per season. Batch fecundity (range: 12,700–81,400) was 23% higher for repeat versus virgin spawners. A bootstrapped estimate of potential annual fecundity for a virgin female—as calculated with an indeterminate fecundity method—was 478,000–544,000 eggs (95% confidence interval), about double the previous (determinate) estimates from this river system (260,000 and 288,000). Until more comparisons are done with other populations, we urge caution in using the many published determinate fecundity estimates of American Shad and other Alosa species.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations23
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the American Fisheries Society→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→