Peer Review #2 of "Are sawfishes still present in Mozambique? A baseline ecological study (v0.1)"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sawfishes (Pristidae) were formerly abundant in the western Indian Ocean, but current data on sawfish presence and distribution are lacking for most of the region.This paper summarises historical records of sawfishes in Mozambican waters and presents the findings of the first assessment of the presence and status of sawfishes in Mozambique.A countrywide baseline assessment was undertaken between May and July 2014, using interviews with artisanal, semi-industrial and industrial fishers, fish traders and fisheries monitoring staff as the primary source of information on sawfish distribution, recent catches, socio-economic value and cultural importance.Additional interviews were conducted via email or telephone with individuals running sport fishing operations or who otherwise had considerable experience interacting with the fishing sectors or the marine environment in Mozambique.Where encountered, sawfish rostra were photographed and a series of measurements and associated data were collected.In total, 200 questionnaire surveys and seven interviews with recreational fishing and dive operators were conducted, and 19 rostra were documented from museum archives and private collections, belonging to two sawfish species, the Largetooth Sawfish (Pristis pristis) and Green Sawfish (P.zijsron).The most recent captures of sawfishes were reported to have occurred in 2014.Two key sites were identified where both recent encounters were reported and numerous Largetooth Sawfish rostra were documented.Gill nets were the fishing gear most commonly attributed to sawfish catches.Sawfishes did not hold any cultural importance in Mozambique, but they have at least some socio-economic importance to artisanal fishers, primarily through the sale of their fins.The meat did not appear to be held in high regard and was usually consumed locally.Sampling and further research is now required to confirm the presence of sawfishes and to assess the primary threats to sawfishes in those areas.At one site where a number of rostra were present and where fishers stated that they still catch sawfish, gill nets are being provided to fishers as an alternative to beach seining.This may have a serious impact on the local sawfish population and more broadly PeerJ reviewing
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 | 0.011 | 0.080 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.178 | 0.072 |
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".