MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122675512 · doi:10.1006/jmsc.2002.1241

Juvenile capelin (Mallotus villosus) off Newfoundland and Labrador in the 1990s

2002· article· en· W2122675512 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapelinMallotusFisheryJuvenileOceanographyGeographyBiologyEcologyGeologyFish <Actinopterygii>Predation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Juvenile capelin, Mallotus villosus (Müller), were distributed primarily on the northern Grand Banks and secondarily along the northeast coast of Newfoundland during late summer, 1994–1999. In some years, distributions extended to coastal Labrador. Capelin were seldom observed over deep water of the northeast Newfoundland Shelf or in shallow water of the southern Grand Banks. There were large areas encompassing wide ranges of capelin densities measured by the IYGPT trawl where the acoustic system did not detect capelin. Mean growth rate of capelin from 0- to 2-group was represented by length (mm)=90.9 age (years) 0.57 (r 2 =99%). The 1-group capelin formed discrete schools that varied significantly in fish length from 65 to 110 mm (p<0.05). Spatially, the different size groups occurred at scales of <55 km and possibly <3 km in some cases. The geographic distribution of age groups was not a simple function of cohort abundance. Capelin were distributed primarily in the middle ranges of temperature (5–8°C) and zooplankton biomass (2–4 g dry weight m −2 ) sampled during the surveys. It is possible that interspecific competition limits the distributions of juvenile capelin, where juvenile Arctic cod ( Boreogadus saida ) and sandlance ( Ammodytes sp.) were abundant to the north and south respectively.

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)0.001
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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207