MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2594881023 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0256

Modeling the drift of European (<i>Anguilla anguilla</i>) and American (<i>Anguilla rostrata</i>) eel larvae during the year of spawning

2017· article· en· W2594881023 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Håkan Westerberg, Selma Pacariz, Lasse Marohn, Vilhelm Fagerström, Klaus Wysujack, Michael J. Miller, Marko Freese, Jan‐Dag Pohlmann, Reinhold Hanel

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Naval ResearchU.S. NavyBundesministerium für Ernährung und LandwirtschaftDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsAnguilla rostrataSargasso seaAnguillidaeFisheryOceanographyLarvaSubtropicsCurrent (fluid)BiologyGeographyEcologyGeologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distribution of the leptocephalus larvae of European (Anguilla anguilla) and American (Anguilla rostrata) eels collected during recent Sargasso Sea surveys was used to model larval drift. The drift trajectories of individual larva were back-calculated to the estimated time of spawning, using current data from two global oceanographic assimilation models. The results of both models give the same overall result; widespread spawning extended in time from December to March. The drift was also calculated forwards for approximately 1 year. The forward drift modelling showed that most leptocephali remained in the area south of the Subtropical Frontal Zone. One conclusion is that the majority of leptocephali remain trapped and possibly die in the retention area. A small proportion of leptocephali are entrained into the Gulf Stream system. An implication is that the spawning success may be highly sensitive to oceanographic and climatic factors that alter the dispersion of leptocephali out from the retention area. An alternative interpretation is that the surveys were made too late after the peak spawning period and that the core spawning area was missed.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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