Information in support of a Recovery Potential Assessment of Lake Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis), Lake Opeongo large-bodied and small-bodied Designatable Units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Lake Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) is a coldwater benthivore with a broad distribution and highly variable ecological and morphological traits across Canada. A species pair of Lake Whitefish in Lake Opeongo, consisting of a large-bodied and small-bodied form, was first discovered in 1940. Both forms (now considered separate Designatable Units, DUs) were assessed as Threatened by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) in April 2018. The reason for this designation was that both DUs are known only from Lake Opeongo, Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, and the introduction of aquatic invasive species could disrupt the unique ecological processes that drove divergence and maintains the species pair (COSEWIC 2018). The Recovery Potential Assessment provides background information and scientific advice needed to fulfill various requirements of the federal Species at Risk Act. This research document provides the current state of knowledge of the species pair including its biology, distribution, population trends, habitat requirements, and threats, which will be used to inform recovery plans. Limited information exists to adequately assess the status of either DU, particularly the small-bodied form. A threat assessment identified the greatest threats to the large- and small-bodied DUs of Lake Whitefish in Lake Opeongo as aquatic invasive species, climate change, and human disturbances; however, the impacts of these threats are not well understood. Mitigation measures and alternative activities related to the identified threats are presented, as appropriate. Important knowledge gaps remain regarding population trends, as well as differences in niche occupancy and impacts of current and anticipated threats on the two 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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".