MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4310579056 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2022-0140

Longitudinal analyses of catch-at-age data for reconstructing year-class strength, with an application to lake trout (<i>Salvelinus namaycush</i>) in the main basin of Lake Huron

2022· article· en· W4310579056 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ji X. He, Andrew E. Honsey, David F. Staples, James R. Bence, Tracy Claramunt

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityMichigan Department of Natural ResourcesMichigan State University
KeywordsSalvelinusTroutFishingFisheryRange (aeronautics)Structural basinEcologyGeographyLongitudinal studyFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental scienceBiologyEngineeringStatisticsMathematicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated using longitudinal models to reconstruct year-class strength (YCS) from catch-at-age data, with an example application to lake trout ( Salvelinus namaycush) in the main basin of Lake Huron. The best model structure depended on the age range used for model implementation. The YCS trajectory from the full age range (3–30 years) was similar to the trajectory from a narrow age range that approximated the age of recruitment to the fishing gears (5–7 years), but YCS estimates from the full age range included additional variations due to time-dependent selectivity and mortality. When using ages younger or older than the likely ages of recruitment, YCS estimates did not represent recruitment abundances and were also biased by trends in age-specific selectivity and mortality across years. Longitudinal YCS estimates are likely more robust than single-age recruitment indices, which are often subject to interannual changes in catchability and selectivity. Our findings provide guidance for future applications of the longitudinal YCS reconstruction that in turn may inform and supplement more comprehensive research and management programs for understanding fish recruitment dynamics.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→