MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2953912671 · doi:10.22215/etd/2019-13590

A socio-ecological risk assessment of the effects of recreational fishing on American Eel (Anguilla rostrata)

2019· dissertation· en· W2953912671 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Margaret A. Litt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCanadian Wildlife Federation
KeywordsAnguilla rostrataFishingRecreational fishingFisheryEndangered speciesRecreationGeographyIUCN Red ListEcologyBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present thesis, I used human dimensions and ecological research techniques to investigate whether recreational fishing poses a threat to American Eel (Anguilla rostrata), an Endangered species in the Canadian province of Ontario and globally (IUCN Red Listed as Endangered).Specifically, in Chapter 2 I explored angler perspectives and behaviour towards the American Eel through interviews.In Chapter 3, I evaluated the effects of simulated catch-and-release angling on American Eel, in terms of mortality and injury over a seven-day holding period.Almost all anglers (90%) who had captured eels in the Ottawa River, Ontario, had released them (Chapter 2), and eels were found to be relatively resilient to catch-and-release events (Chapter 3).Overall, my results suggest that recreational fishing does not pose a threat to American Eel, however this research is only a preliminary assessment and not all variables involved in a true recreational fishing scenario were examined.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→