MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3043053860 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2020-0018

Age-at-size relationships of the American lobster (<i>Homarus americanus</i>) from three contrasting thermal regimes using gastric mill band counts as a direct aging technique

2020· article· en· W3043053860 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Carl J. Huntsberger, Raouf Kilada, William G. Ambrose, Richard A. Wahle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersMaine Sea Grant, University of MaineState of Maine Department of Marine Resources
KeywordsAmerican lobsterHomarusCrustaceanCarapaceJuvenileBiologyDecapodaFisheryEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct age determination of crustaceans has remained a long-standing challenge because all calcified structures are shed with each molt. Cuticle bands in the ossicles of the gastric mill have shown promise as age indicators. We validated the one-to-one relationship between known age and number of cuticle bands for 15 hatchery-raised juvenile American lobsters (Homarus americanus). Additionally, we applied this method to 308 lobsters from three contrasting thermal regimes in New England, USA. Band counts matched our expectations of differences in age-at-size across this thermal gradient; lobsters at harvestable size in southern New England were estimated to be 5.5 (±1.5) years old compared with 7.5 (±1.6) years in the Gulf of Maine. We found 81% of our band count estimates of age fell within 2 years of independent, regionally specified growth model estimates of age-at-size for lobster. Notwithstanding remaining uncertainties regarding the mechanism of band formation, our findings indicate the method may provide an independent and direct means to determine the age of individual American lobsters, which will improve estimates of essential life history parameters.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→