MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116831541 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2025-0114

Changing oceans, ecosystem effects, and Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy

2025· article· en· W7116831541 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jacob Lerner, Anna K. McLaskey, Brian P. V. Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcoholism and Thiamine Deficiency
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFisheries and Oceans Canada
KeywordsEcosystemOncorhynchusChinook windClimate changeWildlifeBiodiversitySituatedWater Framework DirectiveEcosystem approach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s Wild Salmon Policy (WSP) has helped produce numerous accomplishments but its continued effectiveness may be challenged by rapidly changing ocean conditions. To illustrate how incipient ecosystem changes can affect salmon and how the WSP is situated to guide responses to these changes, here we review the emergence of thiamine deficiency complex (TDC) in Chinook salmon. TDC results from a combination of factors that allow it to emerge rapidly. Analyses completed in 2023 indicated that TDC was likely present in eight ecologically distinct Canadian Chinook salmon populations. Responding to developing threats like TDC requires ongoing monitoring, international collaboration, and an understanding of environmental drivers to apply response mechanisms to manage vulnerable populations, key components of the WSP. Still, conducting and integrating mechanistic studies into management remains challenging, especially if climate change alters underlying ecological interactions. In implementing the WSP, re-emphasizing ecosystem studies and supporting them with both a consistent funding source and a specific directive for responsive ecological research could allow Canada to strengthen its ability to safeguard salmon populations in the face of acute ocean changes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicAlcoholism and Thiamine DeficiencyFrench-language works237,207