A new approach toward evaluation of fish bioenergetics models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new approach was used to evaluate the Wisconsin bioenergetics model for lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). Lake trout in laboratory tanks were fed alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) and rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax), prey typical of lake trout in Lake Michigan. Food consumption and growth by lake trout during the experiment were measured. Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) concentrations of the alewife and rainbow smelt, as well as of the lake trout at the beginning and end of the experiment, were determined. From these data, we calculated that lake trout retained 81% of the PCBs contained within their food. In an earlier study, application of the Wisconsin lake trout bioenergetics model to growth and diet data for lake trout in Lake Michigan, in conjunction with PCB data for lake trout and prey fish from Lake Michigan, yielded an estimate of PCB assimilation efficiency from food of 81%. This close agreement in the estimates of efficiency with which lake trout retain PCBs from their food indicated that the bioenergetics model was furnishing accurate predictions of food consumption by lake trout in Lake Michigan.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".