MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401388830 · doi:10.3390/d16080479

Sibling Species Amblyraja hyperborea and A. jenseni in Slope Waters of Eastern Canada: An Ecomorphological Description

2024· article· en· W4401388830 on OpenAlexaffabout
David W. Kulka, Carolyn M. Miri, Sheila Atchison, Mark R. Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueDiversity · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcomorphologyEcologyGeographyBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deepwater survey data and specimens collected from the Grand Banks to Baffin Bay in the Northwest Atlantic were used to examine the distribution, morphometrics, meristics and maturity of two siblings, Amblyraja hyperborea and A. jenseni. Our study confirmed that the two species occupy different locations, their distributions separated by Davis Strait, a biogeographic break separating Atlantic from Arctic waters. A. hyperborea with a smaller maximum size and size at maturity inhabited colder Arctic slope waters in Baffin Bay while larger A. jenseni were located in warmer Atlantic slope waters. Despite their distributional separation and thus reproductive isolation, spine counts and body morphology were almost indistinguishable between species. Only upper jaw teeth row count and difference in the size of spines on the mid-rear wings differentiated the two species. Also, for both species, the proportion of dorsal fins joined, disc shape and relative tail length changed with total length. Secondary reproductive anatomy, clasper length and vas deferens weight, shell gland and uterus weight underwent initial acceleration in growth when the gonads transitioned to stage 2 (adolescent, maturing). Also, YOY A. hyperborea were found to distribute at shallower depths than larger stages, constituting a nursery, which was not observed for A. jenseni.

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 score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.885

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 venueDiversitySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207