MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183103224 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2021-0009

Seasonal residency, activity space, and use of deep-water channels by Greenland sharks (<i>Somniosus microcephalus</i>) in an Arctic fjord system

2021· article· en· W3183103224 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jena E. Edwards, Kevin J. Hedges, Nigel E. Hussey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWorld Wildlife Fund
KeywordsFjordFisheryOceanographyArcticContext (archaeology)Pelagic zoneMarine ecosystemJuvenileEnvironmental scienceApex predatorGeographyEcologyEcosystemBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Arctic ecosystems become increasingly vulnerable to climate- and human-induced stressors, effective marine management will rely on the characterization of fish movements. Over a six-year study period, the movements of 65 Greenland sharks (Somniosus microcephalus) (41 males, 24 females; mean LT = 2.48 ± 0.50 m) were monitored using static acoustic telemetry. Shark presence in a typical deep-water fjord was restricted to the summer open-water period. Residency duration varied based on age class (juvenile, n = 17; subadult, n = 48); however, activity space size and extent were comparable. A quarter of tagged sharks (n = 16) returned to the system in subsequent years after tagging, with individuals redetected for a maximum of 4 years. Movements between coastal and offshore waters occurred primarily via a deep-water channel with sharks detected along the channel banks. These multiyear data depict how a potentially vulnerable Arctic predator utilizes a deep-water fjord in the context of the regional development of community inshore and offshore commercial fisheries.

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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207