MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032527587 · doi:10.1111/fme.12434

Effect of baiting gillnets in the Canadian Greenland halibut fishery

2020· article· en· W3032527587 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shannon M. Bayse, Scott M. Grant

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Management and Ecology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsBycatchHalibutFisheryCatch per unit effortElectrofishingFishingPortunidaeLeopardusBiologyGeographyDecapodaFish <Actinopterygii>Crustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Catch rates were compared between gillnets with and without bait in the Greenland halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides (Walbaum) fishery off Baffin Island, Canada. Two different types of baiting techniques were compared: bait bags where squid were placed into 2‐mm mesh bags, and tied bait where squid were tied into meshes. Both types of baited gillnets significantly increased the capture of the target species, Greenland halibut, with increases of 253.8% and 149.7% for the bait bag and tied bait, respectively. Common bycatch species showed mixed effects, with roughhead grenadier Macrourus berglax Lacépède showing no increase in catch per unit effort (CPUE) for either bait type ( p &gt; 0.05), and porcupine crab Neolithodes grimaldii (Milne‐Edwards and Bouvier) only had a higher CPUE with baited gillnets when bait bags were placed on the footrope. Less common bycatch species—but with threatened populations—showed an increase in CPUE, including Greenland shark Somniosus microcephalus (Bloch and Schneider) and Northern wolffish Anarhichas denticulatus Krøyer. Baiting gillnets affected the CPUE of gillnets in the Greenland halibut fishery, and management should consider how the increased CPUE of both target and bycatch species are affected by this new fishery trend.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0050.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Management and EcologySame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207