MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2117111168 · doi:10.1139/f09-161

Models of the effects of marine-derived nutrients on salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) population dynamics

2009· article· en· W2117111168 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Milo D. Adkison

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNature ConservancyGordon and Betty Moore Foundation
KeywordsEscapementNutrientOncorhynchusBiologyPopulationJuvenileHabitatFisheryProductivityEcologyStock (firearms)Environmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pacific salmon ( Oncorhynchus spp.) populations transfer large quantities of nutrients from their marine to their freshwater habitats. These nutrients have been shown to affect salmon populations in fresh water, including increasing basal food resources and elevating juvenile salmon growth rates and condition. The broader effects on recruitment and commercial harvests, however, are not clear. I developed and explored mathematical models of the effects of these nutrients on stock–recruitment relationships and used these models to investigate management implications. Populations strongly dependent on nutrients had lower sustained yields than those not dependent on nutrients. When nutrients strongly affected the stock–recruitment relationship, relatively low harvest rates and high escapement levels were necessary to maintain the population’s productivity. However, in some scenarios, the highest yields were obtained from small, nutrient-depleted populations. In other scenarios, the nutrient dependence had few management implications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→