MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136453531 · doi:10.2174/1874401x01407010008

The Early Marine Biology of the Hatchery/Wild Juvenile Salmonid(Oncorhynchus sp.) Community in Barkley Sound, Canada

2014· article· en· W2136453531 on OpenAlexaffabout
R. W. Tanasichuk, Jodi Grayson, Jennifer Yakimishyn, Seaton Taylor, Gary D. Dagley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Fish Science Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsParks CanadaHatch (Canada)Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncorhynchusChinook windHatcheryJuvenileFisheryBiologySound (geography)PredationFish <Actinopterygii>ZoologyEcologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We conducted 11 purse seine/beachseine surveys over the summers of 2000 and 2001 to learn about the migration timing, distribution, and diet of hatchery chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and coho (O. kisutch), and wild chinook, coho, sockeye (O. nerka) and chum (O. keta) juvenile salmon, in Barkley Sound, West Coast Vancouver Island. Juvenile salmon partitioned Barkley Sound by time and space, and by diet except for hatchery and wild coho. The analysis of migration timing included historic data for 1987-89, and results showed that timing differed between species and was consistent over years. Sockeye and chum dominated the juvenile salmon community until mid-June and hatchery and wild chinook dominated subsequently. Fish tended to be dispersed contagiously. Results of correlation analyses of catch suggested that fish of different origins and species did not co-occur. The euphausiid Thysanoessa spinifera was an important prey item but different fish species selected different sizes of T. spinifera at different times. The diet overlap between hatchery and wild coho did not affect return. Migration timing for sockeye and wild coho seems to reflect a strategy to enter the ocean when the biomass of the size fraction of T. spinifera that each species selects is likely to be maximal. Descriptions of migration timing, fish interactions, and diet provide information which appears to be useful for learning about the biological basis of salmon return variability.

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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Fish Science JournalSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207