MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946011556 · doi:10.1002/naaq.10098

Strip Spawning Methodology for Captive Propagation of Broadcast-Spawning Cyprinids in the Great Plains

2019· article· en· W2946011556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron C. Urbanczyk, Christa M. Woodley, Gene R. Wilde

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Aquaculture · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Vocal Communication and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceTexas Tech UniversityTexas Parks and Wildlife Department
KeywordsBiologyFisheryZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the summer of 2011, large parts of Texas and Oklahoma experienced their worst drought in recorded history. Most of the rivers and streams in this region are inhabited by cyprinids that broadcast semibuoyant pelagic ova. These fish depend on flowing water for the hormonal cues that induce spawning and to allow ova to develop and hatch as they float downstream. During the drought, the Brazos and Canadian rivers, Texas, were reduced to isolated streambed pools. Monitoring efforts concluded that pelagic, broadcast-spawning cyprinids experienced complete reproductive failure in the Brazos River and had very little spawning success in the Canadian River. Personnel from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Texas Tech University began salvage operations in both rivers in September 2011 to ensure the survival of imperiled cyprinids. In spring 2012, standard captive propagation techniques were used with several species of cyprinids, with little success. As a result, we developed new techniques for four species of pelagic, broadcast-spawning cyprinids from the Brazos and Canadian rivers that could greatly increase hatchery program efficacy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of AquacultureSame topicAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207