MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399872843 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2023-0322

Synchrony of alewife, <i>Alosa pseudoharengus</i>, year-class strength in the Great Lakes region

2024· article· en· W4399872843 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Les D. Warren, Andrew E. Honsey, David B. Bunnell, Paris D. Collingsworth, Darryl W. Hondorp, Charles P. Madenjian, David M. Warner, Brian C. Weidel, Tomas O. Höök

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and biodiversity studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPurdue UniversityGreat Lakes Fishery Trust
KeywordsAlewifeFisheryBiologyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fish recruitment is interannually variable and challenging to predict. Annual recruitment is often regionally synchronized among populations and identifying drivers of such synchrony may help shed light on recruitment dynamics. We investigated interannual variation of alewife Alosa pseudoharengus recruitment by estimating year-class strength for populations from three of the Laurentian Great Lakes (lakes Huron, Michigan, and Ontario) using annual assessment survey data from 1968 to 2022. We first determined the age when year-class strength was set for each dataset. We then used a mixed-modeling approach incorporating age, year-class, and sampling year to estimate year-class strength for each study lake. Thereafter, we evaluated regional synchrony in year-class strength across the three lakes and evaluated potential climatic drivers of synchrony. Our results suggest that alewife year-class strength is set by age-1. Our model-derived indices of alewife year-class strength were synchronized among the three lakes, and we identified spring-summer degree-days as a potential regional driver of synchrony. This analysis highlights the potential for strong influence of climatic conditions on fish recruitment in large freshwater systems.

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)0.000
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicEcology and biodiversity studiesFrench-language works237,207