MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3157381366

Spring inventory of a multispecies spawning ground: ichthyofauna Gatineau River Rapids, Quebec

2004· article· en· W3157381366 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Annie Comtois, François Chapleau, Claude B. Renaud, Henri Fournier, Brent Campbell, Richard Pariseau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpring (device)FisheryGeographyThreatened speciesEcologyBiologyHabitat
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A spring survey of fishes was conducted in the Gatineau River (Quebec), in the first rapids upstream of its confluence with the Ottawa River, to establish the fish spawning chronosequence, especially for the three species of redhorses. The sampling resulted in the capture of 2388 fish belonging to 13 families and 39 species. Six of these species have been assessed by COSEWIC. Sixteen species were in spawning readiness. Spawning of the Silver Redhorse and Shorthead Redhorse occurred first, followed by the River Redhorse. Stage V males of the three redhorse species were captured earlier and in greater numbers than females. These observations are consistent with other studies which suggest that males precede females to the spawning grounds, that females remain there for a short period and that a minimum two males per female is required for reproduction. This study shows that the Gatineau River rapids must be protected because they harbor three species that have obtained a status by COSEWIC (Threatened: Channel Darter; Special concern: Northern Brook Lamprey and River Redhorse) as well as being an important multi-species spawning ground.

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)0.000
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→