MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118097053 · doi:10.1139/f2012-109

A long-lived life history for a tropical, deepwater snapper (<i>Pristipomoides filamentosus</i>): bomb radiocarbon and lead–radium dating as extensions of daily increment analyses in otoliths

2012· article· en· W2118097053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Allen H. Andrews, Edward E. DeMartini, Jon Brodziak, Ryan S. Nichols, Robert L. Humphreys

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiocarbon datingLongevityRange (aeronautics)Semelparity and iteroparityBiologyEcologyGeographyDemographyLife historyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growth characteristics of Pristipomoides filamentosus, a deepwater eteline snapper of major economic importance, are incomplete and inconsistent across its geographical range. Early growth rates have been validated using daily increment and length–frequency analyses, but historical estimates of adult growth rates are variable and longevity is unknown. Studies of P. filamentosus in the Hawaiian Islands have cautioned against unjustified estimates of longevity, but 18 years has at times been uncritically assumed as the maximum age. The present study addresses these age, growth, and longevity issues using lead–radium and bomb radiocarbon dating by providing valid age estimates for adult P. filamentosus. Valid length-at-age estimates ranged from approximately 10 years to more than 40 years. These data, together with robust daily increment data, were used to model a fully validated, long-lived life history for P. filamentosus. This study adds to the few existing studies supporting a view that many tropical fishes, particularly deepwater species, can be longer lived than previously surmised.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations63
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207