MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162259483 · doi:10.1002/nafm.10614

Northern Madtom Use of Artificial Reefs in the St. Clair–Detroit River System

2021· article· en· W3162259483 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer L. Johnson, Justin A. Chiotti, Andrew S. Briggs, James C. Boase, Jan‐Michael Hessenauer, Edward F. Roseman

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinnowFisheryReefHabitatEndangered speciesWildlifeEnvironmental scienceGeographyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The St. Clair and Detroit rivers historically supported abundant fish populations. However, like many river systems, these rivers have been greatly altered through the creation of navigation channels and other anthropogenic disturbances, resulting in the loss of fish and wildlife habitat and declines in native fish populations. To ameliorate this environmental degradation, artificial fish spawning reefs were constructed in the St. Clair and Detroit rivers. One native species to potentially benefit from artificial reefs is the Northern Madtom Noturus stigmosus, a small ictalurid that is listed as endangered in the state of Michigan and the province of Ontario. Between 2016 and 2018, artificial reefs and nearby control sites were sampled in the St. Clair and Detroit rivers to compare the number of Northern Madtoms. In total, 171 Northern Madtoms were captured in 1,848 minnow traps with one of four bait types: cheese, dog food, worms, or control (no bait). Baited minnow traps successfully captured Northern Madtoms in the fast-flowing, deep water of the St. Clair–Detroit River system, and catch rates were significantly higher when traps were baited with worms. The number of Northern Madtoms captured was lower in the Detroit River than in the St. Clair River and increased with increasing water temperature and turbidity. Artificial reefs constructed in the St. Clair–Detroit River system are providing habitat for Northern Madtoms; however, use did not differ between reef sites and nearby control sites. This work provides insight regarding sampling strategies to target Northern Madtoms in large-river systems and highlights the importance of incorporating a temporal sampling strategy into survey design.

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 score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207