MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2136005373 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2013-0308

Multibeam sonar (DIDSON) assessment of American shad (<i>Alosa sapidissima</i>) approaching a hydroelectric dam

2014· article· en· W2136005373 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ann B. Grote, Michael M. Bailey, Joseph Zydlewski, Joseph E. Hightower

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceNature Conservancy
KeywordsAlosaFisheryAlewifeHerringSalmoEnvironmental scienceFish migrationAtlantic herringClupeaFish <Actinopterygii>Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the fish community approaching the Veazie Dam on the Penobscot River, Maine, prior to implementation of a major dam removal and river restoration project. Multibeam sonar (dual-frequency identification sonar, DIDSON) surveys were conducted continuously at the fishway entrance from May to July in 2011. A 5% subsample of DIDSON data contained 43 793 fish targets, the majority of which were of Excellent (15.7%) or Good (73.01%) observation quality. Excellent quality DIDSON targets (n = 6876) were apportioned by species using a Bayesian mixture model based on four known fork length distributions (river herring (alewife, Alosa psuedoharengus, and blueback herring, Alosa aestivalis), American shad, Alosa sapidissima) and two size classes (one sea-winter and multi-sea-winter) of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). 76.2% of targets were assigned to the American shad distribution; Atlantic salmon accounted for 15.64%, and river herring 8.16% of observed targets. Shad-sized (99.0%) and salmon-sized (99.3%) targets approached the fishway almost exclusively during the day, whereas river herring-sized targets were observed both during the day (51.1%) and at night (48.9%). This approach demonstrates how multibeam sonar imaging can be used to evaluate community composition and species-specific movement patterns in systems where there is little overlap in the length distributions of target 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 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 score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations37
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→