MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128986158 · doi:10.1577/1548-8446-34.12.586

The Bait Industry as a Potential Vector for Alien Crayfish Introductions: Problem Recognition by Fisheries Agencies and a Missouri Evaluation

2009· article· en· W2128986158 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert J. DiStefano, Mary E. Litvan, Paul Horner

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrayfishAlienFisheryAlien speciesGeographyBusinessBiologyEcologyInvasive speciesPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract “Bait-bucket introductions” related to the fishing bait industry are the suspected primary cause of alien (non-indigenous) crayfish introductions that have damaged North American aquatic ecosystems. Our 2008 survey of U.S. and Canadian fisheries agencies revealed that 49% of respondents reported aquatic resource problems that were believed to have been caused by bait-bucket introductions of alien crayfishes. Most respondents reported existing regulations designed to address those problems; however, only 4% prohibited the use of live crayfish bait. Our 2002–2007 examination of Missouri bait shops revealed sales of illegal and invasive alien crayfishes by bait shop proprietors who could not identify the species they were selling. Fisheries agencies should consider more effective bait regulations and education to prevent negative impacts to aquatic biodiversity, habitat, and fisheries that can result from alien crayfish introductions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations90
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheriesSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207