MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408802293 · doi:10.1111/fme.12810

Limited Demographic Effects One Decade After Implementation of a Harvest‐Slot Length Limit for Walleye (<i>Sander vitreus</i>) in the St. Lawrence River, Québec, Canada

2025· article· en· W4408802293 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julien Mainguy, Yves Paradis, Rafael de Andrade Moral

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Management and Ecology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Environnement, de la Lutte contre les changements climatiques, de la Faune et des ParcsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanderFisheryLimit (mathematics)GeographyEcologyBiologyMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Although the role of recreational harvest on size structure of declining fish populations is often unclear, bag and size limits are often implemented to prevent overharvest. Long‐term monitoring and periodic assessments of stock status then become necessary to evaluate their potential impacts. Based on a long‐term gillnet monitoring program in the St. Lawrence River, Québec, Canada, the effects of a 381–545 mm harvest‐slot length limit implemented in 2011 were evaluated on walleye (Sander vitreus). Mixed‐effects models revealed continued declines in the abundance of large walleyes, size distribution, total annual mortality, and female growth, condition, and size‐at‐maturity. Expected impacts were mostly not achieved, potentially because of environmental and trophic interaction changes in the St. Lawrence River, in addition to increasing fishing pressure. Our results highlight a need to reassess current walleye fisheries management strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Management and EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207