MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381856563 · doi:10.1007/s00300-023-03167-z

Diets of gadoid fish in Arctic waters of Svalbard fjords during the polar night

2023· article· en· W4381856563 on OpenAlexaff
Lars-Henrik Larsen, Marine Cusa, Sam Eglund-Newby, Jørgen Berge, Paul E. Renaud, Øystein Varpe, Maxime Geoffroy, Stig Falk‐Petersen

Bibliographic record

VenuePolar Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsHaddockGadusBiologyKrillGadidaeFjordFisheryArcticPredationForagingAtlantic codEcologyOceanographyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As the climate warms, boreal fish species are expected to expand into the Arctic domain. Though water temperature is an important factor driving expansion of aquatic species, other variables may play a critical role in restricting those movements. Continuous darkness during the Arctic polar night has been suggested to impair foraging in visually searching boreal fish and may thus limit their northward expansion. We discuss feeding and diet composition of co-existing polar cod ( Boreogadus saida ), Atlantic cod ( Gadus morhua ), and haddock ( Melanogrammus aeglefinus ) during the polar night. The data presented cover January sampling during five consecutive years (2012–2016) in Svalbard fjords (78–80°N). Across species, more than 70% of individuals were feeding. Few stomachs were well filled, suggesting an overall moderate foraging activity or success. The endemic polar cod had the highest frequency of empty stomachs (40%), while Atlantic cod (25% empty) and haddock (21% empty) had fed most extensively. Diet composition indicated opportunistic feeding, with extensive diet overlap of the most abundant prey species (krill, Thysanoessa spp.) during years of highly abundant krill (2014–2015) but reverting to more distinct diets in a year (2016) with lower krill abundance. For all three species, presence of prey items in advanced degrees of digestion indicated feeding activity prior to each annual trawl sampling. The stomach fullness and diet overlap suggest that coexisting and similar sized gadoids feed on the same available prey resources during polar night.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolar BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207