MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399370492 · doi:10.1111/jfb.15827

Validation of a new acoustic telemetry transmitter for the study of predation events in small fishes

2024· article· en· W4399370492 on OpenAlexafffund
Mitchell B. Shorgan, Heather Bauer Reid, Silviya V. Ivanova, Aaron T. Fisk, Steven J. Cooke, Graham D. Raby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of WindsorTrent University
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPredationBiologyTelemetryRainbow troutMicropterusPredatorBass (fish)FisheryTroutPrey detectionEcologyZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acoustic telemetry has emerged as an important tool for studying the movement and behavior of aquatic animals. Predation-sensing acoustic transmitters combine the functions of typical acoustic transmitters with the added ability to identify the predation of tagged animals. The objective of this paper was to assess the performance of a newly miniaturized acid-based predation-sensing acoustic transmitter (Innovasea V3D; 0.33 g in air). We conducted staged predation events in the laboratory where acoustically tagged rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were fed to largemouth bass (Micropterus nigricans) at 3.3-7.0, 9.0-10.8, 16.0-20.0, and 22.0-25.8°C. We also conducted false-positive tests where tagged rainbow trout were held at 10.0 and 16.8°C without the risk of predation. Predation events were successfully identified in 92% of the staged predation trials. Signal lag (i.e., the time required for a predation tag to indicate that predation occurred) ranged from 0.11 to 6.29 days and decreased strongly with increasing water temperature and increased with increasing body mass of the tagged prey. Tag retention in the gut of the predator was much more variable than signal lag and was influenced by water temperature and individual predators but not by prey mass. No false positives were detected after 60 days at either temperature (n = 27 individuals). Although the relationships between water temperature, signal lag, and retention time are likely species-specific, the data reported here provide useful information for the use of these transmitters to study predation in wild fishes, especially for temperate, freshwater fish.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207