MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2925072337 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2018-0170

Growth and longevity of Hawaiian grouper (<i>Hyporthodus quernus</i>) — input for management and conservation of a large, slow-growing grouper

2019· article· en· W2925072337 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Allen H. Andrews, Edward E. DeMartini, Jon Brodziak, Ryan S. Nichols, Robert L. Humphreys

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPacific Islands Fisheries Science Center
KeywordsGrouperLongevityBiologySexual maturityLife historyLife history theoryFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>DemographyRadiocarbon datingEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hawaiian grouper (Hyporthodus quernus) is endemic to the Hawaiian Islands and is regionally important, yet little is known about its life history. This large species is managed within the Deep 7 bottomfish complex, which includes six snapper species that are assumed to have similar life history traits. Previous age estimates were not validated and suggested a maximum age of 34 years. To evaluate the preliminary study and provide a valid basis for life history parameters, we aged otoliths using bomb radiocarbon (14C) dating. Measured 14C values provided ages for smallest to largest fish that differed from the original study. The fundamental information provided here when evaluating Hawaiian grouper conservation status is longevity (valid to 50 years and estimated to 76 years) — no male sampled was <80 cm total length (TL) and younger than 34 years — and age-at-sexual maturity and age-at-sex change, which were indirectly estimated and compared with prior published estimates for this and other groupers. Updated life history parameters (k = 0.078, L∞ = 95.8 cm TL) should be used to improve future management and conservation assessments.

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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→