MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413240422 · doi:10.1111/fog.70005

Skill Testing Oxygen Data for Distribution Modeling of Marine Species

2025· article· en· W4413240422 on OpenAlexafffund
Julia Indivero, Sean C. Anderson, Lewis A. K. Barnett, John E. Pohl, Sean K. Rohan, Samantha Siedlecki, Eric J. Ward, Timothy E. Essington

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Oceanography · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaWashington Sea Grant, University of WashingtonNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsHindcastEnvironmental scienceOceanographyBiogeochemistrySampling (signal processing)Pelagic zoneCurrent (fluid)ClimatologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Spatial models that identify statistical relationships between environmental conditions and species distributional data are commonly used in fisheries research to evaluate habitat suitability and predict distributional shifts, such as those driven by changing ocean temperature and oxygen levels. However, a lack of environmental data—particularly dissolved oxygen—at the same temporal and spatial resolution as biological data can limit these analyses. We evaluate the ability to predict bottom dissolved oxygen via imputation and extrapolation and with biophysical oceanographic models in the northeastern Pacific Ocean (Aleutian Islands, Eastern Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska, British Columbia, and California Current). Specifically, we measure predictive skill compared to in situ observations (measured concurrently with bottom trawl data) for (1) predictions from an empirical statistical model fit to integrated dissolved oxygen observations and (2) a commonly used dynamical oceanographic model estimate of oxygen, the Global Oceanographic Biogeochemistry Hindcast (GOBH). Lastly, we evaluate how estimation and interpretation of a species distribution model are impacted by the use of different oxygen data sources. For year‐out cross‐validation, we find that the empirical statistical model predicts bottom dissolved oxygen for fish catch sampling events with relatively high accuracy in only certain regions (California Current and British Columbia) (root mean squared error [RMSE] ~ 16–30 μmol kg −1 ). Prediction skill was more than two times lower in Alaska regions that did not have extensive data (around < 0.075 observations per square kilometer), and this approach would likely not provide sufficiently accurate oxygen values for SDMs in these regions. The Copernicus Global Oceanographic Biogeochemistry Hindcast had a substantially lower prediction skill than the integrated statistical predictions (RMSE ~30–90 μmol kg −1 ). When applied to species distribution models, the estimated dissolved oxygen thresholds differed by 20–50 μmol kg −1 when fit to different dissolved oxygen data sources. We focus on oxygen in the northeastern Pacific, yet our approach is generalizable to other variables and systems. We recommend increased attention to validating oceanographic models when operationalized to fisheries applications and evaluating the robustness of conclusions to environmental covariate data sources.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries OceanographySame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207