Vertical distribution and aggregation patterns of krill (Crustacea: Euphausiacea) in the Bay of Biscay: interannual and seasonal variability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of krill (Crustacea: Euphausiacea) in oceanic waters of the Bay of Biscay are scarce and restricted to the epipelagic zone, overlooking vertical dynamics such as diurnal vertical migration (DVM). There is a growing interest in acoustically evaluating the biomass of krill in this area, but this requires a good knowledge of its vertical dynamics and aggregation patterns. In this work we employed acoustic data and net samples from two consecutive annual surveys covering a wide off-shelf area of the Bay of Biscay (JUVENA surveys of 2013 and 2014) and four seasonal surveys covering slope and oceanic waters in the Cantabrian Sea (SCAPA surveys of 2015). Vertical dynamics of krill were analyzed in the frame of the environmental seascape. High interannual and seasonal variations in the vertical distribution and aggregation patterns (small swarms, dense aggregations, or loose layers) of krill were observed. The vertical distribution covaried with dissolved oxygen and salinity. According to our findings, the best season to acoustically evaluate krill in the Bay of Biscay is spring, with the bulk of the biomass located above 600 m depth. Moreover, extending the acoustic recording beyond the epipelagic zone is mandatory for any season.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".