Recruitment of Atlantic cod to Newfoundland coastal waters at \ndaily and seasonal scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recruitment of marine fish is influenced by abiotic and biotic processes operating \nat many spatial and temporal scales. Recruitment level was thought to be set during the \nlarval stages but recent evidence suggests that year-class strength can be modified during \nthe early juvenile stages. Annual recruitment has received much attention but variation at \nfiner temporal scales may affect biological processes that influence year-class success. I \ntested the hypothesis that timing of recruitment of fish from the plankton to nearshore \nbenthic areas is determined by water mass movements. I also tested whether seasonal \nrecruitment of fish to near shore bottom habitats was associated with prey availability and \ngrowth rates of post-recruited fish. Seining was conducted daily at one location during \n2002 and biweekly at 12 sites during 1998-2002 to monitor fish densities and arrival \ntimes nearshore. I found that daily recruitment of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua ), \nGreenland cod (Gadus ogac) and hake (Urophycis tenuis) to sites on the northeast coast \nof Newfoundland was associated with onshore winds following upwelling. Results were \nconsistent with larval transport onshore during downwelling. Recruitment of Atlantic cod, \nGreenland cod and hake to the nearshore was not associated with tidal stage. The \nphenology of Atlantic cod recruitment to near shore benthic habitats appears simple but \nseasonal growth rates are more complex. During July to November of2000 to 2002, the \nmonthly pattern of abundance of newly-recruited Atlantic cod near shore was similar to \nseasonal patterns of zooplankton abundance that I observed near shore. Seasonal \nzooplankton abundances near shore were similar to those previously reported offshore . \nNewly-recruited Atlantic cod were relatively abundant during September and October of \n2000-2002. During these months, growth rates of post-recruited fish were also relatively \nhigh. However, I found growth rates of post-recruitment fish were comparatively high \ntwice annually with highest growth occurring during June and October. During both of \nthese months water temperatures were near optimum for growth and the ratio of Atlantic \ncod abundance to zooplankton abundance near shore was similar. Abundance of newlyrecruited \nAtlantic cod near shore was relatively high during May of 2002 when growth \nrates offish were low, contrary to prediction. Monthly abundance of newly-recruited \nAtlantic cod near shore was more closely associated with the amount of zooplankton that \nfish could utilize at observed water temperatures rather than total abundance of \nzooplankton. At daily scales, recruitment of Atlantic cod near shore was found to be \ndetermined by physical processes but both abiotic and biotic processes were important at \nseasonal scales.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".