Evaluation of light traps for sampling lobster larvae in the German Bight, North Sea
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biological monitoring of planktonic animals is greatly dependent on the deployment of traps. A variety of specialized traps have been designed for surface plankton and vertebrates. However, certain groups, such as planktonic larvae of benthic marine invertebrates remain underrepresented in sampling efforts. Catching them has proven to be more challenging because of their size, swimming ability, location, and abundance. In the present study a successful light trap for sampling American lobster larvae in New Brunswick, Canada, is evaluated on the island of Helgoland (German Bight, North Sea). Our results showed the traps were successful in catching larvae in laboratory experiments but were unable to catch European lobster larvae in the field. Traps deployed in the field were successful in capturing other benthic and pelagic zooplankton predominantly consisting of crustaceans from the orders: Cumacea, Amphipoda, Mysida and Isopoda. The low density of lobster larvae, the island's topography, and their unique photactic response possibly limited the success rate of the light traps. Future research is needed to construct a specialized trap to sample Helgoland's lobster larvae and provide information on the current larval fitness and population numbers. • Homarus gammarus larvae light traps tested for the first time on Helgoland. • Traps tested in laboratory experiments at different volumes, successfully caught lobster larvae. • Field light traps caught diverse zooplankton, showing potential for crustacean larvae sampling. • No lobster larvae caught in the field, low numbers and distinctive behavior may be the reasons.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it