Updated assessment of Wolffish related to population status, life history, and habitat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An update of the 2014 assessment of wolffish was conducted to detect changes in population status, life history, habitat use, and fisheries interactions. The data used to assess changes in population status originate from numerous research vessel (RV) surveys with their own spatial and temporal coverage and constraints. Within all surveys, individual catches of wolffish were highly variable with a large number of zero catches resulting in very large confidence intervals around all indices of stock size. Since the last assessment, population status for all three wolffish species throughout Canadian Atlantic and Arctic waters remains largely unchanged and has shown little recovery. Increases in abundance have occurred since the late-1990s for Northern and Spotted Wolffish in Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) Divisions (Div.) 2H and 2J3K, where the majority of both populations reside. New parameters were estimated using models for age/length-at-maturity and growth. These parameter estimates were generally consistent with the range of values found in published studies. Wolffish are demersal fish species found over all bottom types. The three wolffish species occupy varying depth ranges in different regions. The majority of Northern Wolffish occur at depths down to 1,500 m. The majority of Spotted Wolffish and Atlantic Wolffish are restricted to depths less than 1,000 m, and inhabit nearshore waters seasonally. Wolffish thermal ranges vary among geographic regions. Spotted Wolffish have been observed more frequently at higher temperatures than Atlantic and Northern Wolffish where they co-occur. Current monitoring tools and programs are inadequate in most Canadian Atlantic and Arctic commercial fisheries to determine the scale of interactions, discard mortality, and total bycatch of wolffish by species.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".