Age determination, validation and growth of Grand Bank yellowtail flounder (Limanda ferruginea)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Yellowtail flounder (Limanda ferruginea) (Storer, 1839) on the Grand Bank off Newfoundland were traditionally aged using surface-read whole otoliths. Age determination of otoliths from recaptures of fish tagged in the early 1990s indicated that the traditional ageing technique was underestimating the ages of yellowtail flounder when compared with the time at liberty. Age comparisons between whole and thin-sectioned otoliths showed agreement in age readings up to 7 years; thereafter whole otoliths tended to give much lower ages than those estimated by thin sections. Length–frequency analysis of pelagic and demersal juveniles, captive rearing of juveniles and marginal increment analysis all corroborated age determination based on thin sections. Tag-recaptures and bomb radiocarbon assays validated age interpretations based on thin sections in young and old yellowtail flounder, respectively. Ages were validated up to 25 years for females and 21 years for males. However, because of increased narrowing of annuli in thin-sectioned otoliths from old fish, even thin sections may underestimate the true age of the fish. von Bertalanffy growth curve parameters (combined sexes) were L∞ = 55.6 cm total length, K=0.16 and t0=−0.003. These results challenge the conventional view that yellowtail flounder on the Grand Banks are a relatively fast growing, short-lived species.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".