MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114173373 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2012-0451

A validation of parentage-based tagging using hatchery steelhead in the Snake River basin

2013· article· en· W2114173373 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Craig A. Steele, Eric C. Anderson, Michael W. Ackerman, Maureen A. Hess, Nathan R. Campbell, Shawn R. Narum, Matthew R. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBonneville Power AdministrationU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceWashington Department of Fish and WildlifeIdaho Department of Fish and GameCalifornia Department of Fish and WildlifeMassachusetts Department of Fish and Game
KeywordsBroodstockHatcheryFisheryGenotypingBroodBiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismChinook windMicrosatelliteStock (firearms)AquacultureEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>GeographyGeneticsGenotypeArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parentage-based tagging (PBT) is a promising alternative to traditional coded-wire tag (CWT) methodologies for monitoring and evaluating hatchery stocks. This approach involves the genotyping of hatchery broodstock and uses parentage assignments to identify the origin and brood year of their progeny. In this study we empirically confirmed that fewer than 100 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were needed to accurately conduct PBT, we demonstrated that our selected panel of SNPs was comparable in accuracy to a panel of microsatellites, and we verified that stock assignments made with this panel matched those made using CWTs. We also demonstrated that when sampling of spawners was incomplete, an estimated PBT rate for the offspring could also be predicted with fewer than 100 SNPs. This study in the Snake River basin is one of the first large-scale implementations of PBT in salmonids and lays the foundation for adopting this technology more broadly in the region, thereby allowing the unprecedented ability to mark millions of smolts and an opportunity to address a variety of parentage-based research and management questions.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations106
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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