MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2462355944 · doi:10.1139/f10-064

Trophic interactions affecting a key ecosystem component: a multistage analysis of the recruitment of the Barents Sea capelin (Mallotus villosus)

2010· article· en· W2462355944 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dag Ø. Hjermann, Bjarte Bogstad, Gjert Endre Dingsør, Harald Gjøsæter, Geir Ottersen, Anne Maria Eikeset, Nils Chr. Stenseth

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsCapelinMallotusGadusClupeaBiologyFisheryTrophic levelPredationEcosystemEcologyPopulationMarine ecosystemGadidaeTrophic cascadeBiomass (ecology)Apex predatorHerringAtlantic codPredator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Barents Sea stock of capelin ( Mallotus villosus ) has suffered three major collapses (>90% reduction) since 1985 due to recruitment failures. As capelin is a key species in the area, these population collapses have had major ecosystem consequences. By analysing data on spawner biomass and three recruitment stages (larvae, 0-group, and 1-year-olds), we suggest that much of the recruitment failures are caused by predation from herring ( Clupea harengus ) and 0-group and adult Northeast Arctic cod ( Gadus morhua ). Recruitment is furthermore positively correlated with sea temperatures in winter and spring. Harvesting of maturing capelin on their way to the spawning grounds reduced the abundance of larvae significantly, but this reduction to a large extent is compensated for later in life, as mortality is strongly density-dependent between the larval stage and age 1. Altogether, our study indicates a very high importance of trophic interactions, consistent with similar findings in other high-latitude marine ecosystems.

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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations42
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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