MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108741211 · doi:10.1016/j.icesjms.2004.07.007

Depensation, probability of fertilization, and the mating system of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.)

2004· article· en· W2108741211 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sherrylynn Rowe, Jeffrey A. Hutchings, Dorte Bekkevold, Ana Rakitin

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGadusAtlantic codBiologyHuman fertilizationAbundance (ecology)PopulationMatingFisheryMating systemGadidaePopulation growthEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>DemographyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.) have been severely overexploited and are currently at historic population lows, having declined 90% in the North Sea and 99% off northeast Newfoundland in recent decades. Slow rates of recovery and continuing declines may be attributable to depensation, defined as a reduction in per capita growth rate concomitant with reduced population size. Several potential causes of depensation relate to low mating success and consequent reduced production of offspring. We explore the empirical basis of one of these in Atlantic cod using egg fertilization and male abundance data obtained from 21 experimental populations generated by three independent research programmes. We find support for the hypotheses that (a) fertilization rate declines with abundance and (b) variance in fertilization rate increases as population size declines. The former identifies one potential mechanism underlying depensation in Atlantic cod. The latter has negative genetic consequences for effective population size (Ne), resulting in a decline in the ratio of Ne to census population size (Ne/Nc) with declining abundance. Our results may have general implications for the conservation biology of broadcast-spawning marine fish, particularly those with mating systems similar to that of Atlantic cod.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations91
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207