MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560086650 · doi:10.1080/14634988.2016.1254468

Diet and foraging of Round Goby (<i>Neogobius melanostomus</i>) in a contaminated harbour

2017· article· en· W2560086650 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin S. McCallum, Julie R. Marentette, Claire Schiller, Shagun Jindal, Kyle Empringham, Susan E. Marsh‐Rollo, Harri Pettitt‐Wade, Marten A. Koops, Aaron T. Fisk, Sigal Balshine

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Ecosystem Health & Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorFisheries and Oceans CanadaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRound gobyNeogobiusForagingPredationTrophic levelBiologyGobyEcologyInvertebrateFisheryFaunaFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anthropogenic pollution and the introduction of invasive species are two contributing factors to ecosystem degradation. Although Hamilton Harbour (Ontario, Canada), a highly impacted ecosystem, is well-studied, the diet, trophic position, and foraging behaviour of the invasive Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus) in this area is not well understood. In this study, we compared digestive tract contents, foraging behaviour, and stable isotope values of Round Goby from sites of low and high sediment contamination in Hamilton Harbour. We also assessed prey availability by conducting sediment invertebrate abundance analyses at these sites. Regardless of site, Chironomids, Cladocerans, Copepods and Dreissenids were the most common food items found in Round Goby digestive tracts, and females always had heavier gut contents compared to males. Fish from the high contamination site consumed fewer prey items, had lower gut fullness scores, and fed at a lower trophic level based on lower δ13C and δ15N values. Our results suggest that Round Goby living in highly contaminated areas are feeding less than Round Goby from areas of lower contamination, but that these diet differences do not reflect differences in prey availability. Fish from the high contamination site also typically moved more slowly while foraging. Taken together, these results provide an analysis of the main prey items of Round Goby in Hamilton Harbour, and demonstrate how polluted environments can impact diet, trophic position, and foraging of an introduced fish species.

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)0.002
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic Ecosystem Health & ManagementSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207