MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892136397 · doi:10.5066/p9clr26o

Rainbow trout reproduction data from 3 sampling trips (2018-2019) within Glen Canyon, AZ

2022· dataset· en· W6892136397 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUSGS DOI Tool Production Environment · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsEcoMetrixBC Hydro (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanyonRainbow troutPopulationSampling (signal processing)FishingReproductionFish <Actinopterygii>Trout

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

These data were compiled to describe population reproductive structure of rainbow trout in the Colorado River downstream of Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona. Objective(s) of our study were to describe the population on reproductive structure of the rainbow trout population in Glen Canyon on the Colorado River and evaluate the accuracy of nonlethal methods (manual expression and ultrasonography) for assigning sex and reproductive phase. These data represent samples collected in 3 sampling trips fall in October to November 2018, February 2019, and April 2019. These data were collected in Glen Canyon, from Glen Canyon Dam to Lees Ferry on the Colorado River. Specifically, we sampled three reaches within Glen Canyon to represent the upper (A: 2.0 - 4.8 km downstream of the dam), middle (B: 8.7 ? 11.2 km), and lower (C: 18 ? 20.7 km) sections of the tailwater, representing a little more than 1/3rd of the 25-km length of Glen Canyon. These data were collected by the study authors (Crossman, Webb, and Korman) as part of ongoing USGS Trout Recruitment and Growth Dynamics sampling trips in 2018 and 2019. Rainbow trout were sampled from each sampling site on each trip and approximately equal numbers taken from each of four size classes (100-199, 200-299, 300-399, 400-499 mm fork length). Fish were measured for length and weighed and a piece of gonad tissue was preserved for histological assignment in the lab. These data can be used to describe population reproductive structure of rainbow trout, understand less invasive methods for assigning sex, and improve our understanding of how somatic growth and energetic status influence population reproductive structure, reproductive seasonality, and later recruitments.

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: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSGS DOI Tool Production EnvironmentFrench-language works237,207