MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125422929 · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsr016

Searching for Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) spawning sites in the northwest Gulf of St Lawrence (Canada) using molecular techniques

2011· article· en· W2125422929 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alice O.V. Bui, Martín Castonguay, Patrick Ouellet, Jean‐Marie Sévigny

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGadusAtlantic codHaddockFisheryGadidaeOceanographyOverexploitationCod fisheriesGeographyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bui, A. O. V., Castonguay, M., Ouellet, P., and Sévigny, J-M. 2011. Searching for Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) spawning sites in the northwest Gulf of St Lawrence (Canada) using molecular techniques. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68: 911–918. The overexploitation of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) in the Northwest Atlantic led to the collapse of most stocks and the demise of spawning components in the early 1990s. In the northern Gulf of St Lawrence, the spawning component of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Organization Division 4S was believed no longer to exist after the collapse. To verify this hypothesis, we used molecular techniques to identify cod, haddock, and witch flounder (CHW) eggs precisely, in an attempt to locate the potential remaining spawning sites for cod in the northwest Gulf. Ichthyoplankton surveys were conducted in spring from 2005 to 2008. Results were compared with those of surveys that took place in spring in the same area 20 years earlier to determine if there had been any changes in spawning location and egg abundance. Atlantic cod made up the majority (97%) of CHW eggs identified. The presence of stage I cod eggs proved that there is still a cod spawning component in the northwest Gulf of St Lawrence, but egg abundance has declined by about an order of magnitude compared with the 1980s. There was no obvious difference in the location of cod spawning grounds between the two decades.

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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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