MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4221087267 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2021-0241

Evaluating Chinook salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>) response to artificial light in support of bycatch mitigation

2022· article· en· W4221087267 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noëlle Yochum, David R. Bryan, Lyle L. Britt, Barry A. Berejikian, Rebecca Haehn, Scott W. McEntire, Rick Towler, Jeff W. Atkins, Brad Gadberry, Paul Irvin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncorhynchusEscapementChinook windBycatchFisheryEnvironmental scienceArtificial lightFishingFish <Actinopterygii>Light intensityBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In commercial trawl fisheries in the North Pacific and US West Coast, fishermen and scientists are evaluating if artificial lights facilitate escapement of bycaught Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from the trawl by attracting them to an opening provided by a bycatch reduction device. Inconsistent behaviour and escapement rates when lights were used in the trawl led us to conduct a laboratory study to evaluate the role of light properties (intensity, colour, and strobe) on marine Chinook salmon behaviour. Results from this study suggest a negative phototactic response. Light colour and strobe, and the interaction between them, differentially affected behavioural response with regard to mean swimming speed and distance from and habituation to the light. White light intensity had limited influence on response; however, the range of trialed intensities was limited. While behaviour is contextual and responses in a laboratory setting cannot be directly extrapolated to responses in fishing gear, this study highlights the significant role of light properties when trying to affect behaviour for bycatch mitigation and the importance of distinguishing between a response to light and to illuminated surroundings.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→