Intertidal clam surveys in the Tofino Mudflats Wildlife Management Area: recommendations for management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the Tofino Wildlife Management Area (WMA) on the west coast of Vancouver Island, BC, two intertidal clam beds were surveyed to obtain baseline data on species, abundance, biomass, and population structure, with a focus on commercially important clams. It appears that commercially important clams are located in small patches throughout the WMA in areas where the appropriate sediment sizes exist. In comparing the survey sites in the WMA to two active commercial clam beaches in Clayoquot Sound, it can be concluded that the clam densities per square meter at these sites are, in most areas, less than half of those found at some commercial clam beaches. Based on this study, it is unlikely that commercial harvest would be feasible in the WMA mudflats. The WMA advisory committee and harvest managers should take into consideration the small clam populations, their importance to the health of coastal ecosystems, and the ecological impacts of intensive harvest when making management decisions. Monitoring should continue at these two sites and additional surveys should be carried out, so the extent and abundance of commercially important clams in the WMA can be fully understood.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".