MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105846303 · doi:10.1080/00288330.2002.9517067

Habitat preferences of giant kokopu, <i>Galaxias argenteus</i>

2002· article· en· W2105846303 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. L. Bonnett, J. R. E. Sykes

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsThreatened speciesHabitatRiparian zoneEcologyHabitat destructionFisheryGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The giant kokopu (Galaxias argenteus (Gmelin 1789)) is endemic to New Zealand, and is regarded as threatened. A perceived decline of the species has been attributed mostly to the loss and degradation of its habitat. To determine habitat requirements, information from the New Zealand Freshwater Fisheries Database, and from field surveys in the South Island were analysed. These indicated that five habitat features are important: in‐stream cover, deep water, low water velocity, proximity to the sea, and overhead shade/riparian cover. These features were important in two distinct regions surveyed and for both juvenile and adult fish. The effects of different types of riparian and in‐stream cover were examined, but it appeared that the presence of some form of cover was more important than its composition. The conservation and management of giant kokopu will probably continue to be based upon management of their habitat, and these processes will be enhanced by the knowledge of the species’ habitat requirements.

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)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations26
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater ResearchSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207