MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2214359950 · doi:10.1163/15685403-00003502

Reproductive strategies conferring species dominance in marine mysid (Peracarida, Mysida) species in coastal waters off Vancouver Island, BC

2015· article· en· W2214359950 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rianna E. Burnham

Bibliographic record

VenueCrustaceana · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeracaridaDominance (genetics)BiologyEcologyMysidaceaPredationPopulationFisheryCrustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold-water mysid species are key components of north Pacific coastal ecosystems and yet much of their life history remains unknown. In Clayoquot Sound, on the west coast of Vancouver Island, a dozen or so species have been identified, with four occurring consistently in samples: Holmesimysis sculpta (W. Tattersall, 1933), Neomysis rayii (Murdoch, 1885), Telacanthomysis columbiae (W. Tattersall, 1933) (Fukuoka & Murano, 2001) and Columbiaemysis ignota Holmquist 1982. In this article growth and reproduction of these species over a 24-month period (May 2010-April 2012) is described, showing recovery from annual removal by the eastern Pacific grey whale (Eschrichtius robustus (Lilljeborg, 1861)) over winter, when pressure from this main predator has been relieved. Holmesimysis sculpta dominates the species flock by employing different life history strategies. It is less seasonal than sister species, overcoming a presumed resource limitation scenario and exhibits year-round reproduction, thereby demonstrating more rapid population rebound following predation and, therefore, retain dominance.

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 score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrustaceanaSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207