MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Heated competition: how climate change will affect non‐native pumpkinseed <i>Lepomis gibbosus</i> and native perch <i>Perca fluviatilis</i> interactions in the U.K.

2011· article· en· W2153492478 on OpenAlexaff
Emily K. Fobert, Michael G. Fox, Mark S. Ridgway, Gordon H. Copp

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLepomisPerchSympatryBiologyCompetition (biology)EcologyInterspecific competitionIntroduced speciesInvasive speciesZoologyFisheryPredationFish <Actinopterygii>Sympatric speciation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heated and ambient temperature experimental ponds were used to examine competition between introduced pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus and native perch Perca fluviatilis in England, U.K., and how these interactions are likely to change under climate warming conditions. Results from three sets of two-week experiments indicated that in both species and in all sets, growth was faster in heated than in ambient temperature ponds. Growth of both P. fluviatilis and L. gibbosus in sympatry did not differ significantly from that observed in allopatric ponds. Diet analysis indicated that increased resource partitioning occurred when P. fluviatilis and L. gibbosus were reared in sympatry, with P. fluviatilis shifting to a diet higher in microcrustaceans. The results do not support the previous claims of adverse effects of L. gibbosus on P. fluviatilis populations. Under conditions of climate change, however, which have been demonstrated experimentally to enhance L. gibbosus recruitment, this species is expected to become invasive in England, resulting in higher densities that may exert a stronger competitive effect than examined in this study.

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)0.000
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207