MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188769607 · doi:10.3391/mbi.2015.6.3.09

Optimizing sampling effort to detect rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) in southern Ontario rivers

2015· article· en· W2188769607 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Scott M. Reid

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement of Biological Invasions · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundación Charles DarwinGovernment of the United KingdomGalapagos Conservancy
KeywordsCrayfishFisherySampling (signal processing)EcologyAquatic animalEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distribution and status of native and non-native crayfish are monitored across hundreds of lakes in Ontario (Canada). However, a corresponding effort has not been undertaken in flowing waters. Reliable and efficient sampling methods are essential for the detection of new aquatic invaders and tracking the spread of existing invasive species. In this study, a recent dataset for the invasive rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) was used to determine whether the detection probability associated with intensive sampling by hand-capture (20 minutes) of 10 transects could be achieved with fewer transects. Results indicate that sampling more than three transects does not improve rusty crayfish detection. Monitoring designs based on three transects would reduce search effort by 140 minutes at each site; permitting greater spatial coverage or more frequent sampling.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.142 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement of Biological InvasionsSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207