A combined telemetry – tag return approach to estimate fishing and natural mortality rates of an estuarine fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A joint analysis of tag return and telemetry data should improve estimates of mortality rates for exploited fishes; however, the combined approach has thus far only been tested in terrestrial systems. We tagged subadult red drum ( Sciaenops ocellatus ) with conventional tags and ultrasonic transmitters over 3 years in coastal North Carolina, USA, to test the efficacy of the combined telemetry – tag return approach. There was a strong seasonal pattern to monthly fishing mortality rate (F) estimates from both conventional and telemetry tags; highest F values occurred in fall months and lowest levels occurred during winter. Although monthly F values were similar in pattern and magnitude between conventional tagging and telemetry, information on F in the combined model came primarily from conventional tags. The estimated natural mortality rate (M) in the combined model was low (estimated annual rate ± standard error: 0.04 ± 0.04) and was based primarily upon the telemetry approach. Using high-reward tagging, we estimated different tag reporting rates for state agency and university tagging programs. The combined telemetry – tag return approach can be an effective approach for estimating F and M as long as several key assumptions of the model are met.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".