MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399700622 · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2024.102376

Reproducing age variability in grass carp egg samples from the lower Sandusky River, Ohio, USA, using an egg-drift model

2024· article· en· W4399700622 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David T. Soong, P. Ryan Jackson, Patrick M. Kočovský, Lori Morrison, Tatiana García, Santiago Santacruz, Cindy Chen, Zhenduo Zhu, Holly S. Embke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Great Lakes Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsIchthyoplanktonTributaryEnvironmental scienceFisheryGrass carpPelagic zoneFluvialRiver mouthFisheries managementCarpBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>GeographySedimentCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invasive grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella) are currently reproducing in several tributaries to Lake Erie and threatening the Great Lakes ecosystem and fisheries. Grass carp are pelagic river spawners whose fertilized eggs drift downstream from the spawning site, developing as they drift. Variability in spawning time and location together with nonuniform velocities in natural rivers leads to egg age variability in field samples at downstream sampling sites. In this study, the Fluvial Egg Drift Simulator (FluEgg) model was used to simulate the transport of grass carp eggs collected in 12 samples at 9 sites in the lower Sandusky River (Ohio, USA) on July 12, 2017, to replicate the observed variability in egg-age distributions present in field samples. The variability in egg ages in virtual samples compare well to field samples. The most plausible explanations for differences between virtual and field samples are the existence of multiple spawning locations, including a spawning area approximately 8 km upstream from the river mouth, and idealized flow fields derived from a one-dimensional hydraulic model. Despite multiple sources of uncertainty and the deficiency in prescribing detailed spawning activities in the simulations, the results validate the utility of FluEgg together with ichthyoplankton data to identify plausible spawning areas and interpret age variability in field samples. A comprehensive discussion of model limitations and ichthyoplankton sample interpretation provides guidance for those using drift models to inform management actions for control of invasive carp in North America and to protect and restore carp populations in their native range in Asia.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Great Lakes Research→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→