Thermoregulatory behaviour in cod: Is the thermal preference in free-ranging adult Atlantic cod affected by food abundance?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study supports the hypothesis that well-fed cod (Gadus morhua) seek higher temperatures to increase growth rate, and poorly fed cod select lower temperatures to save metabolic energy. Depth and temperature of free-ranging adult cod (44–79 cm) were studied with data storage tags as part of a ranching project in an Icelandic fjord. Forage fish were regularly provided at four feeding stations where cod formed distinct “herds” (herd cod) that did not mingle much with the rest of the unconditioned cod in the fjord (wild cod). Several parameters (stomach fullness, liver index (fat reserves), condition factor, and growth rate) indicated that food intake was much greater in herd cod than in wild cod. In August, when the thermocline was well established, the herd cod remained in shallow (15–35 m) and warm water (8–10 °C), whereas the wild cod stayed in deep (80–90 m) and cold water (3–4 °C), but occasionally both groups explored depths and temperatures outside their preferred range. After vertical mixing in autumn when thermoregulation was not possible, the depth difference between the two groups decreased significantly.
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".