MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411228443 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2025-0046

Warmer springs may lead to more frequent spawning in lake sturgeon

2025· article· en· W4411228443 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gregory R. Jacobs, Molly A. H. Webb, Craig W. Osenberg, Seth J. Wenger, Dimitry Gorsky, Zy Biesinger

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSturgeonLead (geology)FisheryBiologyEnvironmental scienceEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental variation and life history influence reproductive behavior in fishes. Many iteroparous fishes, like lake sturgeon, may transition between spawning and non-spawning states among years in response to recent spawning history, sex, and environmental variation leading to variation in interannual spawning intervals, with strong implications for conservation and management. We combined three capture–mark–recapture datasets to jointly estimate interannual spawning state transitions in lake sturgeon of the lower Niagara River between 2011 and 2020, where temperature drives strong interannual environmental variation. Our Bayesian multi-state capture–mark–recapture model suggested interannual spawning state transitions were best explained by sex-specific responses to water temperatures during the previous spring. With higher spring temperatures, males were less likely to delay spawning, while females were more likely to re-engage in spawning after delaying. Our model thus suggests that both sexes shorten intervals between spawning years in response to warming. Conservation and management of lake sturgeon in the lower Niagara River should account for the link between spawning behavior and environmental temperature, underscoring the need to address similar questions in other long-lived imperiled taxa.

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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.215 · 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→