MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381514972 · doi:10.3354/meps14351

Estimating catchability and density of the European lobster Homarus gammarus from continuous, short-term mark-recapture data

2023· article· en· W4381514972 on OpenAlexaff
DJ Skerritt, MC Bell, Kirsty J. Lees, AC Mill, Clare Fitzsimmons

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Ecology Progress Series · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFisheryFishingStock assessmentHomarusMark and recaptureGammarusAmerican lobsterEscapementPopulationBiologySex ratioCrustaceanEcologyGeographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the commercial and ecological importance of the European lobster Homarus gammarus, estimates of the population dynamics within socio-economically important fishing areas remain understudied. We implemented a mark-recapture approach to estimate population density, rates of loss and catchability of H. gammarus off the coast of northeast England, an important area for lobster fishers, and one of high exploitation. The short-term study used continuous trapping data from a commercial parlour trap array, fished over 6 wk. Over 9 haul occasions, 562 lobsters were marked using persistent external T-bar tags with unique ID numbers; 13.7% of these lobsters were subsequently recaptured. Catch data were used to determine the relationship between trap soak time and the effective fishing effort over time. Capture histories and effort data were analysed using a modified Cormack-Jolly-Seber (CJS) model, adapted for the short-term and continuous nature of the study. Model estimates of male lobster density varied depending on capture occasion between 732 (95% CI = 423, 1267) and 2730 (95% CI = 1585, 4701) lobsters per km2. Similarly, female density was estimated at between 2410 (95% CI = 476, 12176) and 8060 (95% CI = 1592, 40810) lobsters per km2. Low rates of loss of individuals from the area and large differences in catchability between sexes led to a female-skewed density estimate. If these findings are corroborated, the effects of sex-specific catchability and the potential for biased sex composition in populations and catches should be addressed in stock assessments and when interpreting sex ratio data in commercial catches.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Ecology Progress SeriesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207