MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387575600 · doi:10.7755/fb.121.1.4

Distribution of the tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier) in the North Atlantic Ocean by season, sex, and life stage, based on tag and recapture data

2023· article· en· W4387575600 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa J. Natanson, Camilla T. McCandless, Nancy E. Kohler

Bibliographic record

VenueFishery Bulletin · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNortheast Fisheries Science CenterCouncil for Science and Technology Policy
KeywordsFisheryTigerGeographyDistribution (mathematics)Stage (stratigraphy)BiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Movements of the tiger shark (Galeocerdo cuvier) by life stage are largely unknown yet are necessary to determine essential fish habitat and sustainable fishery management practices. In an effort to elucidate distribution and movements of the tiger shark, we analyzed fishery-dependent and -independent tag (sample size [n]=10,516) and recapture (n=762) records for sharks caught in the North Atlantic Ocean during 1963–2018. Seasonal distribution of the tiger shark was examined by life stage—young of the year, juveniles (immature), and adults (mature)—and distribution patterns were used to identify potential nursery habitat. Tiger sharks were caught over a wide area from the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, Canada, south to Brazil and from coastal to offshore waters and into the eastern North Atlantic Ocean. Seasonal north–south movements were observed in all life stages, and 14 immature sharks were found to have migrated from the western to the eastern North Atlantic Ocean. A broad nursery area and a potential birthing area were identified on the continental shelf between Florida and Georgia on the basis of the repeated presence of neonates in summer across years and of the recapture of multiple tagged young-of-the-year sharks from the same location over a period of at least 2 years.

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)0.001
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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFishery BulletinSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207