MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2576722018 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0280

The quantitative use of parasite data in multistock modelling of South African sardine (<i>Sardinops sagax</i>)

2017· article· en· W2576722018 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carryn L De Moor, Douglas Butterworth, CD van der Lingen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicParasite Biology and Host Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSardineStock (firearms)FisheryStock assessmentPopulationParasite hostingFish stockGeographyEcologyBiologyEconometricsFish <Actinopterygii>FishingComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Differences in parasite infection have previously been used to distinguish between fish stocks. We demonstrate a novel use of parasite prevalence-by-length data to inform quantitatively on stock mixing. An initial two mixing stock hypothesis proved consistent with biological and survey data, suggesting that there are different stocks of sardine off the west and south coasts of South Africa. That hypothesis assumed that only recruits moved from the west to the south stock. However, new “tetracotyle”-type metacercarian parasite bio-tag data indicate a need to allow older fish to move between the stocks as well. We demonstrate extension of bio-tagging to inform on the plausibility of population structure hypotheses by including parasite prevalence-by-length data in the model’s likelihood. Our method enables the estimation of the magnitude of mixing between semidiscrete stocks, providing more precise estimates of annual movement. Such improved precision may be important in better informing future movement hypotheses and thereby management. Our research provides a framework to use to inform quantitatively on stock structure and movement hypotheses for other fish species with bio-tagging data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicParasite Biology and Host InteractionsFrench-language works237,207