Density-independent and -dependent habitat selection of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) based on geostatistical aggregation curves in the northern Gulf of St Lawrence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Tamdrari, H., Castonguay, M., Brêthes, J-C., and Duplisea, D. 2010. Density-independent and -dependent habitat selection of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) based on geostatistical aggregation curves in the northern Gulf of St Lawrence. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 67: 1676–1686. Relationships were sought between local density and population abundance of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) in the northern Gulf of St Lawrence (Canada) over its entire area (4RS) and also within a subarea (4R) where the stock has concentrated since it collapsed during the early 1990s. Relationships were analysed using geostatistical aggregation curves computed within the two areas between years of contrasting abundance levels. The curves were interpreted in terms of four conceptual models of spatial dynamics: models D1 and D2, forced mainly by environmental heterogeneity, and models D3 and D4, in which individual behaviour is influenced by local density. Over the entire area, the cod population follows the D2 model for all years and age groups, and it is influenced by abiotic factors. Within the subarea, all four models applied, and the density-dependent basin model (D4) dominated from 2006 to 2008. The year 2006 seems to be pivotal because it coincides with the expansion of the cod population into its former area in the western Gulf (4S).
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".