MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7000475721

Estimating the encounter rate of Atlantic capelin\n(Mallotus villosus) with fish eggs,\nbased on stomach content analysis

2021· article· en· W7000475721 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueAquaDocs (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionTSG101HyporeflexiaDiafiltrationGestational periodArticular cartilage damage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of pelagic fish eggs (cod and cunner) found in stomachs of capelin (Mallotus villosus) sampled in coastal Newfoundland was used to estimate the encounter rates between capelin and prey, and thus the effective volume swept by capelin. Fish eggs were found in 4−8% of capelin stomachs, represented an average of 1% of prey by numbers, and their abundance increased as relative stomach fullness decreased. The average number of eggs per stomach doubled for each 5-cm increase in length of capelin. The effective volume swept for eggs by capelin ranged from 0.04 to 0.84 m3/h—a rate that implies either very slow capelin swimming speeds (<1 cm/s) or that fish eggs are not strongly selected as prey. The predation rate estimated from stomach contents was higher than that predicted from laboratory studies of feeding pelagic fish and lower than that predicted by a simple foraging model. It remains uncertain whether capelin play an important regulatory role in the dynamics of early life stages of other fish.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.263
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquaDocs (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization)Same topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207