Relationships Between Body Condition Indices and Proximate Composition in Adult Walleyes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Relationships between indices of condition and measures of proximate body composition were examined among and within nine populations of mature walleyes Sander vitreus that varied widely in growth rate and lipid status. Body condition, measured as the residuals from mass versus length regressions, was negatively related to mean water content and positively related to mean lipid content among populations. When the roles of water and lipid content were examined simultaneously within populations, most of the variance in condition was accounted for by lipid content. The strength of the relationships between various condition indices and body proximate composition varied considerably among populations but less between sexes within populations. Furthermore, the strength and nature of these relationships was not strongly influenced by the choice of mass‐at‐length index (residuals, relative condition, relative weight, or Fulton's K ). The visceral‐somatic index and muscle lipid content both exhibited slightly stronger relationships with body proximate composition than did mass‐at‐length condition indices for both sexes. The hepatosomatic index was more consistently related to somatic lipid content for females than for males in most populations. Relatively simple condition indices can provide reliable surrogates of body proximate composition in many adult walleye populations, but caution should be exercised in extrapolating from condition‐composition relationships among populations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".