MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406388416 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2024-0151

Temporal dynamics and distributions of sardine and anchovy in the southern California Current Ecosystem

2025· article· en· W4406388416 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrew D. Barton, Barbara Muhling, Brice X. Semmens, Brad Erisman, Matthew T. Craig, Sylvia P. A. Jiménez‐Rosenberg, Gerardo Aceves‐Medina, Andrew R. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSardineAnchovyEnvironmental scienceCurrent (fluid)FisheryEcosystemOceanographyEcologyGeographyFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anchovies and sardines are some of the most economically and ecologically important and well-studied fishes on Earth, but there is still uncertainty regarding how distributions and abundances change through time and space. We bring together larval abundance data for northern anchovy ( Engraulis mordax) and Pacific sardine ( Sardinops sagax) collected by United States and Mexican scientists over 50 years (1963–2015) to test the Basin and Asynchrony hypotheses. The Basin hypothesis states that a species’ geographic range and spawning area ( R) increase with overall abundance ( A) according to a power law, R = aAb , where the exponent ( b) is less than ∼0.5 when the rate of increasing area occupied saturates as population size increases. The Asynchrony hypothesis postulates that anchovy and sardine abundances are negatively correlated through time. We found that the Basin hypothesis was supported for both species but the Asynchrony hypothesis was not during this 53-year period. Due to collaboration between US and Mexican scientists, we were able to better understand how two important fishes utilize their environment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→