MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044351696 · doi:10.26028/cybium/2016-404-001

Length-weight and length-length relationships and condition factors of 30 actinopterygian fish from the Mono basin (Benin and Togo, West Africa)

2016· article· en· W3044351696 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Djiman Lédéroun, Philippe Lalèyé, Emmanuel Vreven, Pierre Vandewalle

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFish Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKU LeuvenAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryGeographyStructural basinBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on their catches, this study describes the length-weight relationships (LWRs), length-length relationships (LLRs), and condition factors (K) of the 30 most common actinopterygian fish found in the Mono basin. A total of 6,591 specimens were caught, using multiple gears and fishing methods, between February 2011 and May 2014. The allometric b coefficient of the LWRs (BW = a × TLb) ranged between 2.650 for Polypterus senegalus and 3.468 for Awaous lateristriga with an average of 2.993 ± 0.177. Thirteen species had an isometric growth, seven species a negative allometric growth, and for the remaining ten species, growth was positive allometric. Regarding the LLRs, the coefficient of determination r2 was significant and ranged from 0.905 in Petrocephalus bovei to 0.999 in Parachanna obscura with an average of 0.973 ± 0.027. The condition factor (K = BW ⁄ TLb × 100) ranged from 0.406 ± 0.044 in A. lateristriga to 2.374 ± 0.805 in Lates niloticus, with an overall average of 1.145 ± 0.161.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.716

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.160 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Repository and Bibliography (University of Liège)Same topicFish Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207