MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128356338 · doi:10.1126/science.1178120

Oceanic Spawning Migration of the European Eel ( <i>Anguilla anguilla</i> )

2009· article· en· W2128356338 on OpenAlexaff
Kim Aarestrup, Finn Økland, Michael M. Hansen, David Righton, Patrik Gargan, Martín Castonguay, Louis Bernatchez, Paul W. Howey, Henrik Sparholt, Michael Ingemann Pedersen, R. S. McKinley

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicReproductive biology and impacts on aquatic species
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité LavalFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSargasso seaOceanographySatellite trackingFisheryAnguillidaeGeographyPacific oceanSatelliteAnguilla rostrataGeologyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

European eels (Anguilla anguilla) undertake a approximately 5000-kilometer (km) spawning migration from Europe to the Sargasso Sea. The larvae are transported back to European waters by the Gulf Stream and North Atlantic Drift. However, details of the spawning migration remain unknown because tracking eels in the Atlantic Ocean has, so far, eluded study. Recent advances in satellite tracking enable investigation of migratory behavior of large ocean-dwelling animals. However, sizes of available tags have precluded tracking smaller animals like European eels. Here, we present information about the swimming direction, depth, and migratory behavior of European eels during spawning migration, based on a miniaturized pop-up satellite archival transmitter. Although the tagging experiment fell short of revealing the full migration to the Sargasso Sea, the data covered the first 1300 km and provided unique insights.

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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations329
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicReproductive biology and impacts on aquatic speciesFrench-language works237,207