Important questions to progress science and sustainable management of anguillid eels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anguillid eels are found globally in fresh, transitional and saline waters and have played an important role in human life for centuries. The population status of several species is now of significant concern. The threats to populations include direct exploitation at different life stages, blockages to migratory routes by dams and other structures, changes in river basin management that impact habitat carrying capacity and suitability, pollution, climate change, diseases and parasites. While much has been done to understand eel biology and ecology, a major challenge is to identify the key research and management questions so that effective and targeted studies can be designed to inform conservation, management and policy. We gathered 30 experts in the field of eel biology and management to review the current state of knowledge for anguillid eel species and to identify the main topics for research. The identified research topics fell into three themes: (a) Lifecycle and Biology; (b) Impacts and (c) Management. Although tropical anguillid eels are by far the least well understood, significant knowledge gaps exist for all species. Considerable progress has been made in the last 20 years, but the status of many species remains of great concern, particularly for northern temperate species. Without improved engagement and coordination at the regional, national and international level, the situation is unlikely to improve. Further, adaptive management mechanisms to respond to developments in science, policy and our knowledge of potential threats are required to ensure the future of these important and enigmatic species.
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 | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".