MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2896485768 · doi:10.1121/1.5067527

Acoustic recordings of Pacific salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus</i> spp.) from a hatchery on Vancouver Island

2018· article· en· W2896485768 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kelsie A. Murchy, Xavier Mouy, Francis Juanes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncorhynchusChinook windFisheryHatcherySound (geography)Fish <Actinopterygii>Range (aeronautics)SalmonidaeGeographyBiologyOceanographyGeologyRainbow trout

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sound production in fish has been documented; however, the diversity of species that create sound is not fully understood. Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) are ecologically, economically, and culturally important in the northeast Pacific. Recent declines in specific species and stocks have increased their public interest. Other species from the family Salmonidae produce sounds, but there is little evidence of any species of Pacific salmon producing sounds. Recording salmon in the wild would be difficult but local hatcheries allow for a unique opportunity to listen for salmon sounds in a semi-natural environment. Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha), pink salmon (O. gorbuscha), and coho salmon (O. kisutch) were recorded using two stationary acoustic recorders that were deployed at a salmon hatchery in Qualicum beach Vancouver Island, British Columbia, for three consecutive weeks in September and October 2017. Audio files were collected in 5 minute subsections and examined for salmon sounds. Here, we present spectrograms and time-frequency composition of potential sounds found for Chinook, pink, and coho salmon. All sounds were then compared to sounds produced by other soniferous fish and to the hearing range of Pacific salmon.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→