MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4281857363 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2022-0028

Temporal evolution of critical traits and their relationship to cod stock collapse and recovery

2022· article· en· W4281857363 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brian Petrie, Kenneth T. Frank, William C. Leggett

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersInstituto Español de Oceanografía
KeywordsGadusAtlantic codCod fisheriesStock (firearms)BiologyGadidaeFishingCapelinPredationFisheryFish stockEcologyGeographyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The North Atlantic Fisheries Organization response to a precipitous decline of the Flemish Cap cod ( Gadus morhua) stock during the 1990s was the imposition of an 11 year moratorium on directed fishing for cod; recovery followed. Over the three decades that encompassed the precollapse, collapse, and recovery stages, we found that the cod stock status was characterized by four traits: spawning stock biomass, maturity-at-age, weight-at-age, and recruitment. The temporal evolution of these traits was consistent with a density-dependent conceptual model suggesting that phenotypic plasticity was at play during the rebuilding of the stock. The temporal progression of the broader fish community paralleled that of cod, underlying its key ecosystem position. The same demographic variables defined the state of the adjacent Northern Cod stock that underwent a similar pattern of decline, an intermittent moratorium but only partial recovery. This partial recovery is possibly related, in part, to declines of prey species brought about by excessive harvesting after the cod collapse and an apparent collapse of capelin, a major dietary component.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→