Annual variation in egg production in a Newfoundland population of the American lobster, Homarus americanus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estimates of the number of eggs produced annually in a Newfoundland population of the American lobster for the 11-year period 1976-86 ranged from 7.4 × 10 6 to 86.8 × 10 6 . Year to year fluctuations in egg production coincided with fluctuations in the estimated number of ovigerous females in the population, which was linked to annual variation in numbers entering the prerecruit and recruit portions of the population. Prerecruit females (< 81 mm carapace length) contributed from 26 to 58% of the total annual egg production. Among prerecruit females 71 to 80 mm CL, the percentage ovigerous ranged from 6.6 to 41.2 ( x ¯ = 24.1 ) https://s3-euw1-ap-pe-df-pch-content-public-p.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/9781003072560/beaad213-a3d4-4805-9fed-530785fa42c1/content/eq18.tif"/> ; among females ≥ 81 mm it ranged from 4.1 to 22.8 ( x ¯ = 8.6 ) https://s3-euw1-ap-pe-df-pch-content-public-p.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/9781003072560/beaad213-a3d4-4805-9fed-530785fa42c1/content/eq19.tif"/> in different years. There was a significant correlation between egg production and the percentage of ovigerous females. For both the prerecruit and recruit size groups there were significant negative correlations between the percentage molting during the summer and the percentage of ovigerous females in autumn. There was a significant negative correlation between standing stock estimates for the population and percentage molting, and a significant positive correlation resulted between standing stock and percentage of ovigerous females. Percentage molting appears to be influenced by population density and a reduced percentage molting leads to an increased percentage laying eggs. Fluctuations in the abundance of females and in the percentage of them that laid eggs accounted for most of the annual variation in egg production in this lobster population.
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) | 0.002 | 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".