MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2169941727 · doi:10.1139/f07-158

Otolith chemistry indicates population structuring by the Antarctic Circumpolar Current

2008· article· en· W2169941727 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julian Ashford, Cynthia M. Jones, Eileen E. Hofmann, Inigo Everson, Carlos A. Moreno, Guy Duhamel, Richard Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBritish Antarctic SurveyNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNational Science FoundationOld Dominion UniversityUniversidad Autónoma de ChihuahuaUniversity of DelawareUniversidad Austral de Chile
KeywordsOtolithCircumpolar starFishingOceanographyPopulationFisheryGeographyEnvironmental scienceEcologyGeologyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-scale transport of seawater in ocean currents may generate spatially complex population structure through the advection of life stages of marine fish species. To test this, we compared the chemistry of otolith nuclei from Patagonian toothfish (Dissostichus eleginoides), presently managed as spatially discrete populations corresponding to fishing management areas along the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC), which transports water eastward around the Southern Ocean. The chemistry of otolith nuclei, laid down during early life, differed significantly between fishing areas off South America and the Antarctic and between some Antarctic areas. However, we found significant discrepancies from expectation for a population structure corresponding to fishing areas. We also found evidence of four groups of fish with different early life chemistry: one associated with South America and three Antarctic groups showing mixing consistent with advective transport along the ACC. These results suggest that toothfish populations are structured by their physical environment; population abundance and persistence may rely on a restricted number of breeding members with access to spawning grounds, whereas fisheries may rely substantially on nonbreeding vagrants transported from fishing areas upstream.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations40
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→