MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104142377 · doi:10.1139/f06-125

Diel vertical migration in the Lake Superior pelagic community. II. Modeling trade-offs at an intermediate trophic level

2006· article· en· W2104142377 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Olaf P. Jensen, Thomas R. Hrabik, Steven J.D. Martell, Carl J. Walters, James F. Kitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCisco Systems
KeywordsDiel vertical migrationPelagic zoneForagingTrophic levelPredationTroutCoregonusSalvelinusBiologyFisheryEnvironmental scienceEcologyFood chainOceanographyFish <Actinopterygii>Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain diel vertical migration (DVM); however, they have generally been applied to DVM behavior of a single trophic level. We evaluate the costs (predation risk) and benefits (foraging rate and growth rate potential) of different hypothetical and observed DVM trajectories for a three-level pelagic food chain in Lake Superior containing opossum shrimp (Mysis relicta), deepwater ciscoes (Coregonus spp.), and lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). Lake trout appear to be maximizing foraging and growth rates by tracking vertically migrating ciscoes, while the DVM trajectories of ciscoes suggests a trade-off between predation risk and growth. For ciscoes, two alternative DVM trajectories both minimize the ratio of risk to growth: a shallow trajectory that follows low light levels down to 80 m during the day and a deep trajectory (below 150 m) that tracks highest Mysis densities. Observed cisco DVM trajectories appear to follow the shallow high risk – high growth trajectory in 2001, but switch to the deep, low risk – low growth trajectory in 2004 when lake trout density was higher and the density of ciscoes was lower.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations87
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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