MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786283620 · doi:10.1139/facets-2017-0069

The biology and ecology of slimy sculpin: A recipe for effective environmental monitoring

2018· article· en· W2786283620 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michelle A. Gray, R. Allen Curry, Tim J. Arciszewski, Kelly R. Munkittrick, Sandra M. Brasfield

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityAlberta EnergyUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSculpinEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental changeBiologyCottusFisheryGeographyEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the use of small-bodied fish in environmental monitoring has increased, particularly within the Canadian environmental effects monitoring (EEM) and other adaptive programs. Although it is possible to measure changes with many small-bodied species, interpretation is often complicated by the absence of information on the biology and ecology of fish not of commercial, recreational, or traditional interest. Knowing and understanding the basic biology of these fishes aids in the sensitivity of study designs (i.e., ability to detect change) and the interpretation of all biological levels of responses (e.g., cellular to community). The increased use of slimy sculpin ( Cottus cognatus Richardson, 1836) in impact assessment studies in North America provides a considerable amount of information on life history aspects. The slimy sculpin has the most ubiquitous North American distribution among cottids but yet has a very small home range, thus integrating environmental conditions of localized areas. This paper describes aspects of slimy sculpin life cycle that affect collection efficiency and timing, and describes and provides data collected over more than 10 years of studies at more than 20 reference study sites. This overview provides a functional and informative compilation to support adaptive environmental monitoring and provide a baseline for comparative ecological study.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.248
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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207