MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312686309 · doi:10.3354/meps09792

Effects of environmental change, fisheries and trophodynamics on the ecosystem of the western Scotian Shelf, Canada

2012· article· en· W2312686309 on OpenAlexaffabout
JN Araújo, Alida Bundy

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Ecology Progress Series · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of Oceanography
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarine ecosystemEcosystemOceanographyEcosystem-based managementFisheryClimate changeEnvironmental scienceBiomass (ecology)GeographyAbundance (ecology)EcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamics of marine ecosystems, which are complex and non-linear, are difficult to predict. Like most marine ecosystems, NW Atlantic systems have been subjected to centuries of fisheries exploitation as well as environmental and internal trophodynamic drivers. By reducing the complexity of the western Scotian Shelf ecosystem to 57 functional living groups, we were able to reproduce many of its observed dynamics, such as major decadal trends in abundance and mortality for most groups, and explore the relative strength within the triad of drivers using a trophodynamic model. We explored potential biophysical drivers through the use of a primary production anomaly, generated by a model fitting routine. The estimated primary production series was negatively correlated with the spring sea surface temperature for the Scotian Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem, a stratification index and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) index. The aggregated biomass of the main resident fish species was also negatively correlated with the AMO index. All 3 drivers contribute to shaping the observed biological and ecological changes of the western Scotian Shelf. This has substantial implications for fisheries management:

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 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 score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Ecology Progress SeriesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207