MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2123000067 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2012-0317

Sea cage aquaculture affects distribution of wild fish at large spatial scales

2013· article· en· W2123000067 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Livia Duncan Goodbrand, Mark V. Abrahams, George A. Rose

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalmoFisheryAquacultureCageSpatial distributionEnvironmental scienceFish farmingSpatial variabilityOceanographyFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyGeographyGeologyStatisticsMathematicsRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aquaculture sea cages are fixed in space and inadvertently provide food to wild animals that is stable through time. We measured the effect of these novel and highly predictable resource patches on the distribution of wild fish across large spatial scales along the south coast of Newfoundland, Canada. Randomized stratified hydroacoustic surveys were used to compare the distribution and abundance of wild fish in bays that contained Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) farms with control bays. Control bays were areas with no history of salmon farming but have been selected for future use by the industry. We found that measures of total area backscatter (nautical area scattering coefficient, NASC) were significantly greater in bays that contain salmon farming compared with control locations. The mean NASC in farmed bays was not significantly different from mean NASC measurements taken directly adjacent to sea cages. Variability around mean NASC estimates could not be explained by the quantity of feed available to consumers, when the number of sea cages in a farm site was used as a proxy for feed availability. Our results suggest that individual-level consumer responses at sea cages can be transmitted across larger spatial scales.

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 score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→