The complex relationship between weight and length of Atlantic cod off the south coast of Newfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between the length and weight of fish is used to assess their growth and condition. This relationship is often assumed to be the same spatially and temporally. However, variability in the weight–length relationship can occur, which provides important information about stock productivity. We developed a spatiotemporal model for the weight–length relationship that is useful for predictions in un-sampled areas. We applied the model to survey data for Atlantic cod off the southern coast of Newfoundland, Canada. We found that weight-at-length was higher inshore, oscillated over time, was below average in recent years, declined during late-January to early-June especially for intermediate sized cod, and that the temporal oscillations were correlated with several local environmental time series. Finally, the model estimated a decrease in the allometric coefficient for intermediate sized cod (40–80 cm), indicating that those cod may be experiencing additional feeding deficiencies. Spatiotemporal variation in the weight-at-length relationship should be accounted for in the stock assessment process when fishery catch numbers are derived from tonnes landed and when estimating stock and fishery weights-at-age.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".