Feeding Interactions between Fishes in a Coastal Ecosystem in the Southern Gulf of St. Lawrence, Atlantic Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Diet composition, diet similarity, and major predator–prey interactions between the 15 most abundant demersal and pelagic fishes (N = 12,163 stomachs) during the period 1999–2003 were described for Northumberland Strait, a semi‐enclosed, marine coastal ecosystem. Of the five pelagic species, Rainbow Smelt Osmerus mordax ate benthic prey (shrimps and polychaetes); Atlantic Herring Clupea harengus and American Shad Alosa sapidissima consumed small copepods and crab zoeae; and Atlantic Mackerel Scomber scombrus and Alewives Alosa pseudoharengus ate small copepods and moderate amounts of benthic prey and small fishes. Three demersal species were strongly piscivorous but with minimal diet overlap: Sea Ravens Hemitripterus americanus consumed small benthic fishes (especially flounders); Winter Skate Leucoraja ocellata consumed sand lances Ammodytes sp. and Rainbow Smelt; and White Hake Urophycis tenuis consumed Atlantic Herring and Atlantic Mackerel. Cluster analysis revealed seven feeding guilds, of which four contained a single species; consequently, the potential for compensation of predatory function was nonexistent for these guilds. The three multispecies guilds comprised consumers of (1) small copepods and crab zoeae; (2) small benthic invertebrates and polychaetes; and (3) shrimps and crabs. Based on diets, the principal route of energy transfer seemed to be the benthic–detrital pathway; however, confirmation requires representative abundance estimates for the various fishes. Moreover, abundances of many fish species have changed (i.e., most have decreased) since this study was completed, with unknown consequences for food web structure and functioning.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".