MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7052280411

Régime alimentaire des poissons de la rivière Lomami, RD du Congo

2023· article· fr· W7052280411 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsMinistère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFish <Actinopterygii>OreochromisTilapiaFish farming
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Une étude sur le régime alimentaire des poissons de la rivière Lomami a été menée sur une période de 8 mois, Février à Octobre 2012, dans le territoire de Katako-kombe pour évaluer les préférences alimentaires de son ichtyofaune. Ainsi, l’observation qualitative des contenus des estomacs de différents poissons capturés a été faite au laboratoire pour trouver les préférences alimentaires des poissons en calculant le taux d’occurrence ou de préférence. Les résultats obtenus ont montré que les poissons de la rivière Lomami ont un régime alimentaire diversifié: les espèces Tilapia nyongana et Oreochromis niloticus sont phytophages à tendance omnivore; le Clarias angolensis et le Chanallabes apus sont polyphage à tendance vorace le Chrysichthys wagenaarii est benthophage à tendance vorace et enfin le Mormyrops zanclirostris est polyphage à tendance herbivore. Ces résultats en rapport avec le régime alimentaire de poissons capturés vont permettre aux pisciculteurs intéressés de faire le choix du type des poissons à élever, en rapport avec la disponibilité de l’aliment localement. Mots clés: Régime alimentaire, poisson, rivière Lomami

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)0.001
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.379 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→