Movement types of an Arctic benthic fish, shorthorn sculpin (<i>Myoxocephalus scorpius</i>), during open-water periods in response to biotic and abiotic factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shorthorn sculpin (Myoxocephalus scorpius) are among the most numerous consumers in the Arctic nearshore marine habitats. Despite this, little is known about their movement ecology or predator–prey interactions, particularly with Arctic cod (Boreogadus saida), an important forage fish in the Arctic. Using acoustic telemetry, the movements of tagged sculpin and cod were quantified based on specific locations using a Vemco positioning system during open water when both species were present in the near shore. Movement trajectories of sculpin distinguish three unique types: foraging and feeding behaviour and large transiting movements. The relative time of each of these movement types were correlated to biotic (presence of large numbers of acoustically tagged Arctic cod) and abiotic factors (percent ice coverage and temperature). This study provides unique data on the movement, feeding ecology, and behaviour of an abundant Arctic benthic fish that demonstrates similar movement types to temperate fish. However, further study is needed to quantify specifically the trophic interactions of these important fish and impact on food webs in the rapidly changing Arctic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".