MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2220054153 · doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12598

Quantifying relative fish abundance with <scp>eDNA</scp>: a promising tool for fisheries management

2015· article· en· W2220054153 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Ecology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des ForêtsUniversité Laval
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCatch per unit effortAbundance (ecology)FisheryEnvironmental scienceRelative species abundanceEnvironmental DNABiomass (ecology)TroutEcologySpatial ecologySpatial distributionBiologyBiodiversityFish <Actinopterygii>Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Assessment and monitoring of exploited fish populations are challenged by costs, logistics and negative impacts on target populations. These factors therefore limit large‐scale effective management strategies. Evidence is growing that the quantity of eDNA may be related not only to species presence/absence, but also to species abundance. In this study, the concentrations of environmental DNA ( eDNA ) from a highly prized sport fish species, Lake Trout Salvelinus namaycush (Walbaum 1792) , were estimated in water samples from 12 natural lakes and compared to abundance and biomass data obtained from standardized gillnet catches as performed routinely for fisheries management purposes. To reduce environmental variability among lakes, all lakes were sampled in spring, between ice melt and water stratification. The eDNA concentration did not vary significantly with water temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and turbidity, but was significantly positively correlated with relative fish abundance estimated as catch per unit effort ( CPUE ), whereas the relationship with biomass per unit effort ( BPUE ) was less pronounced. The value of eDNA to inform about local aquatic species distribution was further supported by the similarity between the spatial heterogeneity of eDNA distribution and spatial variation in CPUE measured by the gillnet method. Synthesis and applications . Large‐scale empirical evidence of the relationship between the eDNA concentration and species abundance allows for the assessment of the potential to integrate eDNA within fisheries management plans. As such, the eDNA quantitative method represents a promising population abundance assessment tool that could significantly reduce the costs associated with sampling and increase the power of detection, the spatial coverage and the frequency of sampling, without any negative impacts on fish populations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.199 · 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