MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2089311755 · doi:10.1139/f00-007

Assessing covariability among populations in the presence of intraseries correlation: Columbia River spring-summer chinook salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>) stocks

2000· article· en· W2089311755 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Louis W. Botsford, Charles M. Paulsen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncorhynchusChinook windEscapementFisherySalmonidaeBiologyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental scienceSalmo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assessed covariability among a number of spawning populations of spring-summer run chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the Columbia River basin by computing correlations among several different types of spawner and recruit data. We accounted for intraseries correlation explicitly in judging the significance of correlations. To reduce the errors involved in computing effective degrees of freedom, we computed a generic effective degrees of freedom for each data type. In spite of the fact that several of these stocks have declined, covariability among locations using several different combinations of spawner and recruitment data indicated no basinwide covariability. There was, however, significant covariability among index populations within the three main subbasins: the Snake River, the mid-Columbia River, and the John Day River. This covariability was much stronger and more consistent in data types reflecting survival (e.g., the natural logarithm of recruits per spawner) than in data reflecting abundance (e.g., spawning escapement). We also tested a measure of survival that did not require knowing the age structure of spawners, the ratio of spawners in one year to spawners 4 years earlier. It displayed a similar spatial pattern.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations28
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→