MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558666600 · doi:10.1093/plankt/fbw075

Considering non-predatory death in the estimation of copepod early life stage mortality and survivorship

2016· article· en· W2558666600 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wendy C. Gentleman, Erica Head

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plankton Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalanus finmarchicusCopepodSurvivorship curveEstimationEcologyPopulationVital ratesBiologyLongevityMortality rateAllee effectStage (stratigraphy)StatisticsPopulation growthDemographyEconomicsCrustaceanMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimation of early stage mortality is essential for predicting copepod population dynamics and ecological linkages. Standard methods do not distinguish among types of mortality, nor do they consider that samples may include dead individuals, which can lead to misinterpretation and bias. Here, we develop theory to explain how non-predatory death, or “expiration”, influences in situ abundances. We present an amended population dynamics model that accounts for the production of non-viable eggs, expiration of live individuals and losses of dead individuals. This model is used to derive generalizations of four vertical mortality estimation methods, including the widely used Vertical Life Table approach. These new formulae are applied to data for Calanus finmarchicus in the Labrador Sea to illustrate the potential effects of reduced viability on estimated early stage loss rates and survivorship. Results show that even slight reductions in viability can impart significant changes, with the nature of the effect varying among methods, consistent with previous studies. We explain the reasons for these differences and how the common practice of aggregating stages masks the ecological significance of egg viability. Our analysis reinforces previous recommendations for scientists to consider expiration in their estimates of mortality, and in designing their empirical studies.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plankton ResearchSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207