MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098521707

Marine habitat mapping in support of Marine Protected Area management in a subarctic fjord: Gilbert Bay, Labrador, Canada

2010· article· en· W7098521707 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarine protected areaBenthic zoneHabitatSubarctic climateBenthic habitatSubstrate (aquarium)Marine spatial planningPopulationMarine habitats
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents an approach that allows production of benthic substrate and habitat maps in fjord environments. This approach is used to support the management of the Gilbert Bay Marine Protected Area (MPA) in southeastern Labrador, Atlantic Canada. Multi-beam sonar-derived bathymetry, seabed slope, and acoustic reflectance (backscatter) were combined using supervised classification methods and GIS with ground-truthed benthic sampling in order to derive maps of the substrates and main benthic habitats. Six acoustically distinct substrate types were identified in the fjord, and three additional substrate types without a unique acoustic signature were recognized. Ordination by multidimensional scaling and analysis of similarity generalized these to four acoustically distinct habitat types. Greatest within-habitat (alpha) diversity was found in the coralline-algae encrusted gravel habitat. Greatest between-habitat (beta) diversity was found in the management Zones 1 and 2, which have the highest level of protection. The study confirmed that the zoning plan for the MPA, which was designed to protect spawning and juvenile fish habitat for a local genetically distinct population of Atlantic cod, afforded highest levels of protection to areas with highest habitat diversity.

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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207