MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2909983780 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2018-0295

Moving repatriation efforts forward for imperilled Canadian freshwater fishes

2019· article· en· W2909983780 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Karl A. Lamothe, D. Andrew R. Drake

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThreatened speciesRepatriationFreshwater ecosystemEcologyEcosystemEndangered speciesFisheryGeographyClimate changeFreshwater fishBiologyHabitatFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freshwater ecosystems are among the most threatened environments on our planet. Disturbances across the terrestrial landscape accrue within freshwater ecosystems and, combined with global stressors such as climate change and invasive species, create a complex situation for recovering imperilled fishes. Given the drastic global decline of freshwater fishes, similarly extreme efforts are needed for their conservation and recovery — repatriation represents one such opportunity. Species repatriation describes the act of releasing a species in areas where extirpation has occurred. Paradoxically, a long history of fish introductions for recreational purposes exists, yet examples of repatriation for imperilled fishes are relatively rare compared with terrestrial species. Stemming from the restoration and species introduction literature, we identify five ecological themes to consider when evaluating repatriation potential of freshwater fishes and suggest that repatriation represents the “drastic” approach needed to achieve meaningful conservation milestones.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0190.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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