MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925479554 · doi:10.17895/ices.pub.25635723

Non-Predation Natural Mortality Of Norway Pout (Trisopterus Esmarkii) In The North Sea.

2001· other· en· W6925479554 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) · 2001
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAge structureQuarter (Canadian coin)Fish <Actinopterygii>Age groupsMortality rateNatural death

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No abstracts are to be cited without prior reference to the author.Based on catch rates at age in bottom trawl surveys, commercial catch at age, and stomach content data of the main piscivorous fish in the North Sea new estimates of non-predation natural mortality, M1, are obtained for Norway pout (Trisopterus esmarkii (Nilsson)). Simple catch curve type analysis and rough maximum likelihood procedures are applied. M1 of Norway pout increases with age and gets very high for age 2 and older fish (0.07 for age 0, 0.13 for age 1, 1.82 for age 2, 2.84 for age 3 and 3.74 for age 4). Survey data from each of the 4 quarters of the year show that the main mortality takes place between the 1st and the 2nd quarter of the year, i.e. from before to after spawning, thus pointing at spawning as the main factor. However, a lack of correlation between annual total mortality of age 1 and annual percentage mature Norway pout of age 1 points away from spawning as the main factor. An alternative hypothesis is that growth stress is the main factor. There are no reasons to believe that M1 has changed considerable over the recent decades.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES)Same topicDigital Marketing and Social MediaFrench-language works237,207