Bomb radiocarbon age validation for the long-lived, unexploited Arctic fish species Coregonus clupeaformis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growth rates of freshwater fish in the Arctic would be expected to be very low, but some previous studies of lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) have reported relatively rapid growth and longevity estimates of less than 15 years. We used bomb radiocarbon chronologies to validate an ageing method based on otolith sections for lake whitefish in both an unexploited Arctic lake (MacAlpine Lake; longevity 50 years) and a lightly exploited temperate population (Lake Simcoe; longevity 49 years). Our results confirm previous suggestions that other ageing methods can seriously underestimate lake whitefish age after ~5–8 years. A Chapman–Robson estimate of instantaneous natural mortality rate (M) of 0.12 in the unfished Arctic lake was one-quarter of that measured in other Arctic lake whitefish populations, and one-third of that predicted by Pauly’s (1980) growth–temperature equation. The high estimates of M reported in other whitefish studies and by Pauly’s equation are almost certainly due to their being based on (incorrect) scale or surface otolith ages. Radiocarbon dating confirms that any attempt at predicting sustainable production for long-lived freshwater fishes like lake whitefish will need to be based on accurate ages derived from otolith sections.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".