Advances in Fish Tagging and Marking Technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.—In the Gulf of Maine region, Atlantic cod Gadus morhua, are managed as three separate stocks: in U.S. waters, the Gulf of Maine (5Y) and Georges Bank (5Z) stocks and in Canadian waters, the Bay of Fundy stock (4X). The Northeast Regional Cod Tagging Program (NRCTP), a large-scale, international collaborative tagging program, was initiated in 2003 and provides the first region-wide, international snapshot of cod movements, mixing, and growth across all three management areas. As the 2008 stock assessment of Atlantic cod was approaching, these mark–recapture data (114,473 tag releases and >6,500 recaptures) were being analyzed for stock identification purposes. Analysis of raw and weighted data indicate exchanges between different areas which are likely related to spawning behavior, maturation, and environmental conditions. Two core assumptions when defining a stock are that (1) the stock is self-sustaining and that (2) neighboring stocks exist in isolation; the migration patterns observed in the current study may substantially violate both assumptions. With additional ongoing assessments into spatial variation in key life history characteristics of growth and natural mortality, the NRCTP exemplifies the role of conventional mark–recapture data in the complex process of stock identification. The geographic scale and quality of data collected during the NRCTP also confirm the value of international, industry-science collaborative research initiatives; involving this data in both stock assessments and future management initiatives is rewarding to the ~250 commercial and recreational fishermen who tagged cod for this program.
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 | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.015 |
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".