MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Yellowtail Flounder (<i>Limanda ferruginea</i>) off the Northeastern United States: Implications of Movement among Stocks

2004· book-chapter· en· W4388228259 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deborah R. Hart, Steven X. Cadrin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimandaFisheryBenthic zoneGeographyPopulationPelagic zoneBayGroundfishDemersal zoneOceanographyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>FlatfishFishingGeologyFisheries managementDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Models and assessments of fishery resources typically assume that fish stocks are closed populations (i.e., that there is neither immigration nor emigration). In reality, some exchange among stocks often occurs, yet the implications of such exchanges have rarely been investigated. Yellowtail flounder, Limanda ferruginea, is an example of a fish species for which such movement has been documented (Royce et al. 1959, Lux 1963). The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate the use of the RAMAS Metapop model (v. 4.0) as an exploratory tool to investigate the consequences of exchanges among stocks for the population dynamics of yellowtail flounder. Yellowtail flounder is one of the most important commercially exploited groundfish off the northeastern United States. It inhabits relatively shallow waters (20–100 m) in the northwest Atlantic from Labrador to the Chesapeake Bay. Spawning occurs in spring and early summer. The pelagic egg and larval stages last about 2 months, during which time they can be transported considerable distances by currents. Postlarval juveniles and adults are benthic and feed primarily on small arthropods and polychaete worms (Bigelow and Schroeder 1953, Collette and Klein-MacPhee 2002).

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→