MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2604135135 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0249

Walleye recruitment success is less resilient to warming water temperatures in lakes with abundant largemouth bass populations

2017· article· en· W2604135135 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gretchen J. A. Hansen, Stephen R. Midway, Tyler Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersWisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesU.S. Geological SurveyUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison
KeywordsMicropterusBass (fish)FisheryEnvironmental scienceHabitatClimate changeBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lakes respond heterogeneously to climate, with implications for fisheries management. We analyzed walleye (Sander vitreus) recruitment to age-0 in 359 lakes in Wisconsin, USA, to (i) quantify the relationship between annual water temperature degree days (DD) and walleye recruitment success and (ii) identify the influence of lake characteristics — area, conductivity, largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) catch rates, and mean DD — on this relationship. The relationship between walleye recruitment and annual DD varied among lakes and was not distinguishable from zero overall (posterior mean = −0.11, 90% CI = −0.34, 0.15). DD effects on recruitment were negative in 198 lakes (55%) and positive in 161 (45%). The effect of annual DD was most negative in lakes with high largemouth bass densities, and, on average, the probability of recruitment was highest in large lakes with low largemouth bass densities. Conductivity and mean DD influenced neither recruitment nor the effect of annual DD. Walleye recruitment was most resilient to warming in lakes with few largemouth bass, suggesting that the effects of climate change depend on lake-specific food-web and habitat contexts.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations51
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→