1980s population-specific compositions of two related anadromous shad species during the oceanic phase determined by microchemistry of archived otoliths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The specific stock composition and dispersion of anadromous fish species aggregations in the marine environment are poorly known, while they can play a major role in the metapopulation dynamics. Otolith microchemistry has proven to be a powerful tool to address natal origins of anadromous fish. We used archived otolith microchemistry to investigate the population-specific composition of subadult European shads (Alosa alosa and Alosa fallax) in the ocean during the 1980s. The allocation of natal origin was addressed relying on contemporary water and juveniles’ signatures within a Bayesian model. A great discrimination of natal origin was obtained at the Biscay Gulf scale. However, the discrimination of 1980s natal origin for the southern rivers with similar geology based on 2013 water and juveniles’ baselines was doubtful. Our results showed that the most abundant southern populations were dominant, suggesting that population-specific composition was related to population relative abundance. The dispersion in the marine environment was plastic; alternatively, shads were found large distances away from their natal rivers, while others remained in the vicinity of their natal river plume.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 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".