Management Plan for River Herring in the Connecticut River Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
None supplied. Introduction: River herring is a collective term for the alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus, and blueback herring, Alosa aestivalis, two anadromous fish species that are related to the American shad. The coastal range of the alewife extends from northeastern Newfoundland to South Carolina, while that of the blueback herring extends from Nova Scotia to Florida. Both species undertake upriver spawning migrations during spring. Alewives may live as long as 10 years and reach a length of 36 cm (13 in.). Due to similarities in size, appearance, and habits, the two species were seldom discriminated and thus the term 'river herring,' referring to either or both species, often appears in the literature and historical records. River herring were abundant historically in streams throughout New England but have experienced a decline in this century. There is ample evidence of the existance of river herring throughout the lower Connecticut River basin. Blueback herring range in the mainstem extends to Bellows Falls, VT, similar to American shad. Unlike blueback herring, alewives are rarely found in the Connecticut River north of Holyoke, MA. The most important factor limiting herring populations appears to be restricted access to spawning and rearing habitat due to dams. However, the population has continued to decline despite recent habitat restoration efforts, suggesting other detrimental factors like unfavorable marine conditions and/or overabundance of striped bass.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.105 | 0.013 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".