Estimates of juvenile and adult raggedtooth shark (<i>Carcharias taurus</i>) abundance along the east coast of South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A Cormack–Jolly–Seber model was developed to estimate abundance, survival, and probability of capture for juvenile (<1.8 m total length, TL) and adult (>1.8 m TL) raggedtooth sharks (Carcharias taurus) along the east coast of South Africa. Model estimates were adjusted to account for tag loss, nonreporting, and after release mortality. The model was constructed using mark–recapture data from the Oceanographic Research Institute and Port Elizabeth Museum cooperative tagging programs from 1984 to 2004. The adjusted estimate for juvenile survival was 0.56 and that for adult survival was 0.89. The adjusted estimate of probability of capture for juvenile sharks ranged from 0.06 to 0.17, while that for adult sharks was from 0.02 to 0.04. The mean annual abundance of juvenile sharks was 6800 (coefficient of variation, CV = 13%) and adult sharks 16 700 (CV = 9%). The accumulated effect of tag loss, nonreporting, and after release mortality were to reduce the overall estimate of juvenile and adult abundance by approximately 50%. The adjusted estimate of population size for both juvenile and adult sharks over the last decade appears to have remained constant (P > 0.05).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".