Distribution and biological characteristics of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) at Greenland based on the analysis of historical tag recoveries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Reddin, D. G., Hansen, L. P., Bakkestuen, V., Russell, I., White, J., Potter, E. C. E., Dempson, J. B., Sheehan, T. F., Ó Maoiléidigh, N., Smith, G. W., Isaksson, A., Jacobsen, J. A., Fowler, M., Mork, K. A., and Amiro, P. 2012. Distribution and biological characteristics of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) at Greenland based on the analysis of historical tag recoveries. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 69: 1589–1597. In this study, we examined 5481 records of tag recoveries at Greenland from a new tagging database held by ICES that contains information on salmon tagged in Canada, France, Faroes, Greenland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Spain, the UK (Northern Ireland, Scotland, England, and Wales), and the United States from the early 1960s to the present. For 4806 of the tag recoveries, latitude and longitude information were available, describing, to varying degrees of accuracy, the location of recovery of tagged fish. Release and recovery dates were variable, but no significant differences over time were noted. The information derived from tag recoveries was used to describe the distribution and growth of salmon of different origins. The proportion of recoveries from East Greenland suggested that potential multi-sea-winter salmon from northern Europe have a more easterly distribution than those from southern Europe. The location of recovery of salmon of North American origin differed from that of European salmon along the west coast of Greenland. Tag recoveries by country were not uniformly distributed across the respective NAFO Divisions. Tags from salmon originating in Canada and the United States were more commonly recovered in northern locations than tags from European-origin salmon. Analysis of rates of tag recovery suggested similar rates before and after the introduction of the NASCO Tag Return Incentive Scheme. The straight-line migration speed of both North American and European salmon changed very little over the time-series, but was ∼40% greater for North American salmon (0.43 m s−1) than for European salmon (0.29–0.32 m s−1).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".