MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133270355

Assessment of Div. 2J+3KL Capelin and evaluation of proposed LRP

2024· other· en· W7133270355 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pêches et Océans Canada

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapelinGroundfishBiomass (ecology)HerringEcosystemZooplanktonProductivityOverfishingTrophic level
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ocean climate on the Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) shelf fluctuates at decadal time scales, with potential impacts on ecosystem productivity. The warmer and potentially more productive period emerging since 2018 has continued in 2022. Overall conditions of the past three years are indicative of improved productivity at lower trophic levels in the NL bioregion (Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization [NAFO] Divisions [Divs.] 2J3KL). This includes earlier phytoplankton blooms, higher chlorophyll concentrations, and increased zooplankton biomass with a higher abundance of larger, more energy-rich Calanus copepods. Fish communities in NL marine ecosystems continue to experience overall low productivity, with total biomass well below pre-collapse levels. While the fish community has returned to a finfish-dominated structure, groundfish rebuilding stalled in the mid-2010s. Ecosystem indicators in recent years appeared to show improvements, but the lack of surveys in 2022 prevented an update of these trends. The 2J3KL Capelin stock has been depleted since 1991. The Capelin acoustic biomass index in 2022 was 262 kt (90% confidence interval 177–448 kt), a level generally higher than the post-collapse period (1991–2022), but well below the 1985–90 period. Capelin indicators derived from predator diets also suggest similar biomass levels in 2019 and 2022. There was no commercial Capelin fishery in 2022 due to market reasons. In 2022, peak timing of beach spawning was typical of the post-collapse period. The larval index was the highest observed in nearly a decade, but average compared to the post-collapse time series and low relative to the productive pre-collapse period. These two indices suggest 2022 was a weak year-class. Fall Capelin condition has been high since 2019; however, while there is confidence that condition was high in 2022, the estimate may not be directly comparable with prior estimates due to an earlier than usual sampling time in 2022. Since the Capelin forecast model is sensitive to fall condition, the results can only be described qualitatively due to uncertainty in the 2022 condition value. The Capelin acoustic biomass index in 2023 is expected to be at or above the level of 2022. A Limit Reference Point (LRP) was chosen for 2J3KL Capelin from a suite of LRP options based on the history of the stock trajectory and biology, and its importance to the ecosystem as a whole. Using Northern cod as an ecosystem indicator, a 640 kt Capelin acoustic biomass index was selected as the current LRP below which the Capelin stock and ecosystem are likely at risk of serious harm. This level is expected to support the growth of the Northern cod stock to levels last observed in the 1980s. Since 1991, with the exception of 2013 and 2014, the Capelin stock has been in the Critical Zone. The upper confidence limit (95th percentile) from the 2022 acoustic survey biomass index was 449 kt, indicating a very low (less than 5%) probability of being above the LRP. Consistent with the DFO decision-making framework, incorporating the precautionary approach requires that removals from all sources must be kept at the lowest possible level until the stock clears the Critical Zone.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada→French-language works237,207→