Recovery Potential Modelling of Lake Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) in Lake Opeongo, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) has assessed the Lake Opeongo species pair (DU 13 and 14) of Lake Whitefish (LWF, Coregonus clupeaformis) in Canada as Threatened. Population modelling is presented to assess the impacts of harm and determine abundance and habitat recovery targets in support of a recovery potential assessment (RPA). This analysis demonstrated that LWF populations of both DUs were most sensitive to perturbations to adult survival. Population viability analysis was used to identify potential recovery targets. Demographic sustainability (i.e., a self-sustaining population over the long term) can be achieved with adult female population sizes of ~450 to ~2,300 for the large bodied DU or ~1,300 to ~8,700 for the small-bodied DU depending on catastrophe frequency and desired persistence probability. Lake Opeongo has sufficient habitat for populations of both DUs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".