MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3200023255 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2021-0068

Long-term interplay between harvest regimes and biophysical conditions may lead to persistent changes in age at sexual maturity of Northeast Arctic cod (<i>Gadus morhua</i>)

2021· article· en· W3200023255 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carl Jakob Rørvik, Bjarte Bogstad, Geir Ottersen, Olav Sigurd Kjesbu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsGadusSexual maturityAtlantic codArcticFishingFisheryStock (firearms)BiologyOceanographyEnvironmental scienceGeographyEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This investigation commenced by constructing principal maturation schedule equations as a function of fishing mortality (F), key biophysical factors and a term attributed to fisheries-induced adaptive change (FIAC). Following the onset of industrial trawl fishery on the model stock, Northeast Arctic cod (NEAC; Gadus morhua) (1934–2020), F on immature age group 5–8 years (F5-8) increased and mean age at 50% maturity (A50) decreased from ≈10 years in the late 1940s to ≈7 years today. Large annual fluctuations in total stock biomass (TSB), sea temperature (KolaT) and F5-8 were used to better understand A50 responses. In the model, the annual accumulation of F5-8 drives FIAC. The model includes the option that NEAC may sustain F5-8 up to a certain level (F_bal) before FIAC becomes statistically evident, with F_bal falling between 0.00 and 0.40 for A50. This dynamic range in F_bal indicates a sophisticated, underlying adaptive response. Independent of F_bal, our analysis clarifies that FIAC is necessary to explain the observed changes in A50.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→