MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4224288567 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2021-0244

Response of alewife abundance to the bacterial kidney disease outbreak in the Chinook salmon population of Lake Michigan: importance of predation

2022· article· en· W4224288567 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Charles P. Madenjian

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlewifePredationPopulationBiologyOncorhynchusPopulation densityFisheryBiomass (ecology)Abundance (ecology)EcologyPredatorFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prey fish abundance can be influenced by predation (top-down) and food limitation (bottom-up) effects. I characterized temporal trends in yearling and older (YAO) alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) biomass density, as estimated by a long-term bottom trawl survey, in Lake Michigan during 1973–2019. Special attention was given to the bacterial kidney disease (BKD) outbreak in the population of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), the predominant predator on alewives in the lake. YAO alewife biomass density exhibited a steep and significant decline during 1973–1985, but then partially rebounded with a significant increase between the 1983–1985 and 1986–2003 (BKD years) periods, followed by a significant decrease between the 1986–2003 and 2004–2006 periods. YAO alewife biomass density showed another significant decline during 2004–2019. The BKD outbreak led to a partial relaxation of predation on the YAO alewife population, and YAO alewife biomass density responded by showing a moderate increase in 1986 and then fluctuating about this moderately higher level for more than 15 years. Overall, temporal trends in YAO alewife biomass density were primarily driven by predation.

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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations6
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→