MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407149428 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2024-0167

Divergence of sexual size dimorphism between wild and hatchery chum salmon under intensive Japanese hatchery programs

2025· article· en· W4407149428 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kentaro Morita, Shunpei Sato

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsHatcherySexual dimorphismFisheryBiologyDivergence (linguistics)OncorhynchusZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial propagation weakens sexual selection by reducing male–male competition and female choice, which favor larger males in natural reproduction. If homing ability and sexual selection were strong, wild-origin salmon would exhibit more pronounced male-biased sexual size dimorphism (SSD) than their hatchery-origin counterparts. We conducted field sampling of chum salmon ( Oncorhynchus keta) in two Japanese rivers, where hatchery fish were marked using otolith thermal marking. The length at maturity of hatchery salmon differed by only 1–2 cm between males and females, whereas the length at maturity of wild-dominated salmon was 5–6 cm larger in males than in females. The mean age at maturity of wild-dominated fish was 0.2–0.3 years higher than that of hatchery fish, but no significant sex differences were observed in either origin. Additionally, macro-level comparisons of SSD, calculated as log 10 (male length/female length), among 21 populations showed that wild-dominated populations had significantly higher SSD than hatchery-dominated populations. Overall, hatchery salmon exhibited weaker SSD, consistent with reduced sexual selection in the hatchery.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→