Evidence for temperature-dependent shifts in spawning times of anadromous alewife (<i>Alosa pseudoharengus</i>) and blueback herring (<i>Alosa aestivalis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyzed four decades of presence–absence data from a fishery-independent survey to characterize the long-term phenology of river herring (alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus; and blueback herring, Alosa aestivalis) spawning migrations in their southern distribution. We used logistic generalized additive models to characterize the average ingress, peak, and egress timing of spawning. In the 2010s, alewife arrived to spawning habitat 16 days earlier and egressed 27 days earlier (peak 12 days earlier) relative to the 1970s. Blueback herring arrived 5 days earlier and egressed 23 days earlier (peak 13 days earlier) in the 2010s relative to the 1980s. The changes in ingress and egress timing have shortened the occurrence in spawning systems by 11 days for alewife over four decades and 18 days for blueback herring over three decades. We found that the rate of vernal warming was faster during 2001–2016 relative to 1973–1988 and is the most parsimonious explanation for changes in spawning phenology. The influence of a shortened spawning season on river herring population dynamics warrants further investigation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".