MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162866477 · doi:10.1111/jfb.12447

To fast or feed: an alternative life history for anadromous brook trout <i>Salvelinus fontinalis</i> overwintering within a harbour

2014· article· en· W2162866477 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aaron D. Spares, Michael J. Dadswell, John L. MacMillan, Reginald J. Madden, R. K. O’Dor, Michael J. W. Stokesbury

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of AgricultureOcean Tracking NetworkAcadia UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalvelinusFontinalisOverwinteringBiologyFish measurementTroutFish migrationFisheryPopulationEcologyAnimal scienceFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The seasonal feeding pattern of sea-run brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis was studied from November to May 2010-2012 in Antigonish Harbour, Nova Scotia, Canada (45° 38' N; 61° 55' W). Sixty-three S. fontinalis (mean ± s.d. fork length = 330 ± 70 mm and mass = 536 ± 351 g) captured had fed predominantly on fishes (Fundulidae and Gasterosteidae). Percentage of empty stomachs was highest during autumn (18%) and winter (22%) and lowest in spring (7%). Stomach fullness increased from autumn to a maximum during winter, relating to near-zero body temperatures which may have effectively stopped gastric evacuation. Although feeding occurred during winter (December to March), consumption rates were calculated as negative values, and subsequently returned to positive values in spring (April to May). The over-winter life-history strategy of this sea-run S. fontinalis population appears to be a feeding marine migration in which fish continually increase body condition, representing an alternative to the more common overwintering strategy of starvation in fresh water until spring.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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