MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139134314 · doi:10.1139/f02-139

Key principles for understanding fish bycatch discard mortality

2002· article· en· W2139134314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael W. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBycatchStressorFishingFish mortalityFisheryEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Risk analysis (engineering)BiologyEnvironmental scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mortality of discarded fish bycatch is an important issue in fisheries management and, because it is generally unmeasured, represents a large source of uncertainty in estimates of fishing mortality worldwide. Development of accurate measures of discard mortality requires fundamental knowledge, based on principles of bycatch stressor action, of why discarded fish die. To date, discard mortality studies in the field have focused on capture stressors. Recent laboratory discard experiments have demonstrated the significant role of environmental factors, size- and species-related sensitivity to stressors, and interactions of stressors, which increase mortality. In addition, delayed mortality was an important consideration in experimental design. The discard mortality problem is best addressed through a combination of laboratory investigation of classes of bycatch stressors to develop knowledge of key principles of bycatch stressor action and field experiments under realistic fishing conditions to verify our understanding and make predictions of discard mortality. This article makes the case for a broader ecological perspective on discard mortality that includes a suite of environmental and biological factors that may interact with capture stressors to increase stress and mortality.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations490
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207