Lake Sturgeon Age Validation using Bomb Radiocarbon and Known‐Age Fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Pectoral fin spines have been the accepted structure for estimating the age of various sturgeon species for nearly 100 years, though other structures have also been used (otoliths, pectoral girdle, scutes, and caudal fulcra). Accuracy of age estimates using any of these structures has not been validated, so we report the first use of bomb radiocarbon ( 14 C) assays to assess the validity of ages estimated using growth increments on pectoral fin spine and otolith frontal cross sections from lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens ; we also assessed age estimates from pectoral fin spines of known‐age lake sturgeon. Growth increments on pectoral fin spine cross sections underestimated true age of fish older than 14 years and error increased with age, whereas otoliths accurately estimated true age up to at least 52 years. Increment formation on pectoral fin spine and otolith cross sections from juvenile lake sturgeon (ages 2‐11) was similar, although pectoral spines were clearer and easier to interpret. A power function (true age = [estimated age] 1.054796 , where estimated age was determined from pectoral spines; r 2 = 0.98) provides a means for correcting existing age estimates obtained from lake sturgeon pectoral fin spines.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".