MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102909581 · doi:10.1139/f00-247

The influence of smallmouth bass (<i>Micropterus dolomieu</i>) predation and habitat complexity on the structure of littoral zone fish assemblages

2001· article· en· W2102909581 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Pamela S. D. MacRae, Donald A. Jackson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsMicropterusMinnowCentrarchidaeBiologyPimephales promelasLittoral zoneBass (fish)EcologyLepomisFisherySticklebackSpecies richnessHabitatElectrofishingPhoxinusPredationFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fish assemblages in small lakes ([Formula: see text]50 ha) in central Ontario were characterized to determine the impact of smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) predation and habitat complexity on the structure of littoral zone fish assemblages. Data were collected employing minnow traps and visual assessment. Although species richness did not differ between lakes with and without smallmouth bass, species composition and relative abundance did differ. We identified two distinct fish assemblage types: one characterized by small-bodied species, mainly cyprinids, and a second by large-bodied centrarchid species, e.g., smallmouth bass. Smallmouth bass appear to reduce abundance, alter habitat use, and extirpate many small-bodied species such as brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans), fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas), pearl dace (Margariscus margarita), and Phoxinus spp.

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 score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations137
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207