MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416150342 · doi:10.1139/facets-2025-0092

Fish and fishing in the Upper Severn River Watershed: listening to stories and exploring changes over time

2025· article· en· W4416150342 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
James N. Beck, Dan R. Duckert, Lindsay P. Galway

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsFishingFish <Actinopterygii>Active listeningGovernment (linguistics)WatershedFish stockArtisanal fishing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although relationships with fish and fishing remain central to culture, health, and daily life for many First Nation communities, ongoing effects of settler-colonialism, accelerating environmental change, and industrial activity threaten cultural continuity, health, and well-being. Research examining people–fish relationships, fishing practices, and interconnections between fish and health is lacking in Ontario’s Far North and nonexistent in the Upper Severn River watershed. To address these gaps and respond to the priorities of the Keewaytinook Okimakanak Tribal Council and member First Nations, this research examined how fish, fishing practices, and people–fish relationships interact with health and have changed over time. Community members from four First Nations ( n = 18) with experience fishing in the Upper Severn River watershed shared perspectives, stories, and experiences through conversational interviews. Thematic network analysis resulted in three global themes and nine organizing themes. Global themes include (1) interactions between fish, fishing, health, and well-being; (2) influences on, and effects of, changes surrounding fish and fishing; and (3) the future of fish and fishing. The discussion summarizes key contributions that are also priority areas for protecting and promoting the health of waters, lands, fish, and people of the Upper Severn River Watershed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designQualitative
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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207