Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effectiveness of a new bycatch reduction device (BRD) was tested across a wide geographical range to determine its use in the NSW oceanic prawn-trawl fishery. Using four commercial trawlers, each from a different port located in the fishery, we compared the catches and bycatches from conventional trawls with those from trawls containing composite panels of netting (60 mm and 40 mm) hung on the bar and inserted into the top anterior section of the codend (termed the composite-panel codend). This panel was designed so that the 40-mm mesh 1) would allow some small fish to escape and 2) would distribute the load anterior and lateral to the 60-mm mesh (which was located in an area where waterflow was thought to be greatest), allowing the 60-mm mesh to remain open and thus facilitate the removal of larger fish. Simultaneous comparisons against a control codend showed that the composite-panel codend significantly reduced the weights of discarded bycatch at all four locations (means reduced by 23.5% to 41%) and the numbers of juveniles of commercially important species, such as whiting, Sillago sp. (by up to 70%). At three of the locations the composite-panel significantly increased the catches of the prawn Penaeus plebejus (5.5% to 14%) and, although not statistically significant, showed a similar trend at the fourth location (mean increase of 4%). As a result of this study, the composite-panel codend has been adopted and voluntarily used by fishermen throughout the New South Wales oceanic prawn-trawl fishery.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 1.000 | 1.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".