MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416269705 · doi:10.1002/ece3.72483

Within‐Ecosystem Comparison of Bigmouth Buffalo <i>Ictiobus cyprinellus</i> and Common Carp <i>Cyprinus carpio</i> Reveals Diverging Population Trajectories, Declining Recruitment, and a Lifespan of 148 Years

2025· article· en· W4416269705 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alec R. Lackmann, Jeff Sereda, Patrick J. Villeneuve, Michelle Foley, Mike Pollock, Reid Bryshun, Katlin McCallum, Ethan Englot, Megan Zak, Cole Rehbein, Ewelina S. Bielak‐Lackmann, M. Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanWater Security Agency
FundersCollege of Science and Engineering, University of MinnesotaUniversity of Minnesota DuluthUniversity of SaskatchewanFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsCommon carpPopulationCommon speciesInvasive speciesIntroduced speciesCarpReproductionFauna

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The bigmouth buffalo Ictiobus cyprinellus is a long‐lived, migratory freshwater fish native to North America whose numbers are declining amidst increasing conservation concerns. Recent studies have uncovered long lifespans, delayed maturation, and episodic recruitment of bigmouth buffalo. Building from previous work in the Qu'Appelle watershed of Saskatchewan, here we quantify otolith‐derived population demographics of bigmouth buffalo and invasive common carp Cyprinus carpio across multiple sites in the drainage. The common carp ( n = 125) and bigmouth buffalo ( n = 173) collected from 2018 to 2024 reveal that common carp reach asymptotic size two times faster, live three times shorter lives, and invest significantly more into reproduction while also exhibiting recruitment stability during the water control era (post‐1958). Indeed, invasive common carp now outnumber native bigmouth buffalo in this watershed by at least an order of magnitude. In contrast, only a single year class (1997) was evident for bigmouth buffalo after 1949. Therefore, only one recruitment year was evident for this species since common carp were first detected in the system in 1955. Remarkably, we find that as of 2024 more than 90% of bigmouth buffalo in this system are greater than 75 years old with a known maximum age of 148 years. We now know that the bigmouth buffalo is the 11th longest‐lived vertebrate out of more than 66,000 species, and across diverse systems can have recruitment gaps longer than any other animal. Bigmouth buffalo require immediate conservation reassessment amidst ongoing population declines.

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)0.000
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and Evolution→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→