MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327599448 · doi:10.47536/jcrm.v6i1.784

Entrapment of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) in herring weirs in the Bay of Fundy, Canada

2023· article· en· W4327599448 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aleksija Neimanis, H. N. Koopman, A. J. Westgate, L. D. Murison, A. J. Read

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issue · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhocoenaWeirFisheryBayHerringPorpoiseBycatchHarbourPopulationFishingBlubberCapelinGeographyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>Archaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) are small coastal cetaceans vulnerable to mortality in fishing operations. Not all interactions are fatal, however, and each year many porpoises swim into and are subsequently released from herring weirs in the Bay of Fundy, Canada through a targeted release programme. This study examines catch composition, body condition, characteristics associated with mortality and factors affecting entrapment of porpoises in weirs between 1992-2001. A total of 886 porpoises were recorded in weirs during this period. A total of 657 animals were involved in attempted releases: 588 were released alive and 69 were incidentally killed during release. The remainder of the animals swam out on their own or their fates were unknown. Estimated annual mortality represents less than 0.01% of the Bay of Fundy/Gulf of Maine population and only 1.03% of its annual potential biological removal level. The number of porpoises caught in weirs varied from eight in 1996 to 312 in 2001. Of the 390 animals released with a numbered identification tag, 25 were recaptured in weirs and 4 of those porpoises entered a weir a third time. Males comprised 63.5% of entrapments. Weirs and demersal gillnets captured animals from the same population, but the weir bycatch was biased towards younger, smaller animals. Porpoises that became trapped in weirs exhibited measures of body condition similar to those killed in gillnets and by gunshot wounds in the same waters. None were considered emaciated. Mortality in weirs appeared to be random; porpoises that died during release attempts were of the same age and sex composition and body condition as the individuals that survived. The use of a specialised large-mesh seine significantly increased the probability of successful release. Observations of the stomach contents data of porpoises killed in weirs indicate that porpoises feed while trapped in weirs, but perhaps not at the same rate as animals killed in gillnets. Entrapments peaked in August, concurrent with the highest landings of Atlantic herring, the target species of the weir fishery. Based on a logistical regression model, porpoises are 3.3 times more likely to swim into a weir on a night in which high tide falls during darkness. Weir entrapments do not have a significant effect on this population, largely because of on-going efforts to release porpoises from weirs.

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)0.000
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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issueSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207