MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141545144 · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsp216

Coherent trends in contiguous survey time-series of major ecological and commercial fish species in the Gulf of Maine ecosystem

2009· article· en· W2141545144 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janet A. Nye, Alida Bundy, Nancy L. Shackell, Kevin D. Friedland, Jason S. Link

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNortheast Fisheries Science CenterNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsGeographyFisheryFishingPopulation dynamics of fisheriesPopulationBiomass (ecology)EcosystemEcologyStock assessmentFish <Actinopterygii>Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nye, J. A., Bundy, A., Shackell, N., Friedland, K. D., and Link, J. S. 2010. Coherent trends in contiguous survey time-series of major ecological and commercial fish species in the Gulf of Maine ecosystem. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 67: 26–40. Fish are often delineated into distinct population or stock units that reflect human institutional borders more than ecological factors. In the Northwest Atlantic, there are many species in the broader Gulf of Maine area (GOMA), yet the area is surveyed and managed for the most part in the south by the United States and in the north by Canada. Biomass time-series of 19 representative fish species and total biomass from 7 different surveys conducted by the United States and Canada in the GOMA are compared. All species showed coherent trends in relative biomass across at least two survey time-series, and in many species a single trend could describe all time-series trends accurately. For instance, Canadian and the US time-series of Atlantic cod, Atlantic herring, haddock, thorny skate, and goosefish had comparable trends. Conversely, species such as longhorn sculpin and spiny dogfish showed differing survey time-series trends and asynchronous event timing, suggesting that their population dynamics differ spatially. Collectively, the results demonstrate the value of comparing time-series for common species from contiguous ecosystems and elucidate the relative importance of environmental and fishing factors on each 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207