MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280489180 · doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.876488

Atlantic Cod Growth History in Flemish Cap Between 1981 and 2016: The Impact of Fishing and Climate on Growth Performance

2022· article· en· W4280489180 on OpenAlexaff
Raquel Ruiz‐Díaz, Rosario Domínguez‐Petit, Fran Saborido‐Rey

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Marine Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlemishFishingChronologyStock (firearms)Environmental scienceClimate changeFisheryGeographyOceanographyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flemish Cap cod collapsed in the early 90’s after facing multiple threats due to climate variability and anthropogenic pressures. A master 35-year cod growth chronology was reconstructed in the present study by using sclerochronology techniques. Three additional chronologies were developed to account for the age-dependent effect of maturity and fishing intensity on growth. All chronologies showed that cod growth has decreased over the years and it is currently at the minimum level in the historic of data series. Hierarchical mixed-effects models were applied to the master chronology to identify extrinsic drivers of growth. The master chronology was divided into 3 periods: Premoratorium (1988-1998), Moratorium (1999-2009), and Postmoratorium (2010-2019). Our results showed that drivers of cod growth in the Flemish Cap varied between periods (Premoratorium: bottom temperature and fishing mortality, Moratorium: cod and pandalus abundance, and Postmoratorium: cod abundance and thickness of the cold intermediate layer). Our results suggest that density-dependence processes, food availability, and global warming may be behind the lack of recovery of the Flemish Cap cod stock. The Flemish Cap cod growth chronology shows variations on growth over time and identifies its drivers, having the potential to be included in the NAFO stock assessments or to be used to set dynamic reference points that guarantees the stock sustainability.

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 score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Marine ScienceSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207