MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285491137 · doi:10.1002/nafm.10813

Bycatch of Loons Assessed in Coastal Arctic Char Fisheries in the Canadian Arctic

2022· article· en· W4285491137 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mark L. Mallory, Gregory J. Robertson, Shane Keegan, Ingrid L. Pollet, Les N. Harris, Tyler Jivan, Jennifer F. Provencher

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityFisheries and Oceans CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaAcadia University
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaNunavut General Monitoring Plan
KeywordsBycatchFisheryArctic charThreatened speciesWeirBayGeographyEstuaryEcologyFishingSalvelinusBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>HabitatTrout

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bycatch in fisheries remains one of the biggest conservation threats to seabirds globally, but there has been limited attention given to bycatch in the Arctic. Here, we worked with Inuit commercial fishers in the Cambridge Bay region of Nunavut to record bycatch of birds as part of a fish bycatch reporting initiative, in weir and gill-net fisheries that target anadromous Arctic Char Salvelinus alpinus. Weir fisheries, and one of the gill-net fisheries (executed in freshwater), had no bird bycatch, but 291 loons (family Gavidae) were captured over 5 years in one estuarine–marine fishery, yielding an exceptionally high bycatch rate of 15.7 birds/1,000 net-meter-days. One of the species caught, the yellow-billed loon Gavia adamsii, is considered near threatened, but data on the population status of this species is insufficient to determine whether bycatch forms a significant threat. Nonetheless, deterrence efforts or other conservation options are needed in estuarine gill-net fisheries to reduce bird bycatch.

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)0.001
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207