Is recovery of northern cod limited by poor feeding? The capelin hypothesis revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The slow recovery of the “northern” Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) stock off Newfoundland and Labrador has been ascribed to many factors. One hypothesis is poor feeding and condition as a consequence of a decline in capelin (Mallotus villosus), their former main prey. We compared the growth and condition of cod from known inshore (Smith Sound) and offshore (Bonavista Corridor) centres of rebuilding in wild subjects versus captive subjects fed an unlimited diet of oily rich fish. Wild fish in these areas have had different diets and population performance trends since stock declines in the early 1990s. Captive cod from both areas grew at the same rates and achieved equivalent prime condition, while their wild counterparts differed, with smaller sizes, lower condition in small fish, and elevated mortality levels in the offshore centre. Environmental temperature conditions did not account for the differences in performance of wild fish. Our results suggest that fish growth and condition, and hence rebuilding in the formerly large offshore spawning components of the northern cod, have been limited by a lack of capelin in their diet. Furthermore, we suggest that these groups are unlikely to rebuild until a recovery in capelin occurs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".