The incidence of anadromy and season estuary use of native Atlantic salmon and brook charr, and invasive brown trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brown trout were introduced to Newfoundland in the late 1800s and are now established in watersheds on the Avalon, Burin and Bonavista peninsulas. Little is known about estuary use by brown trout outside of their native or their impacts to native Atlantic salmon and brook charr. A relatively pristine watershed in eastern Newfoundland was chosen to investigate seasonal use of estuary habitat by these three species, and to investigated if I) the incidence of anadromy in each species, 2) the quality of offspring of anadromous and resident, and 3) if the waterfalls are barriers to migration. A fourth objective was to test if a laser ablation "drilling" technique can successfully extract growth history information from otoliths. Abundance of adult brown trout was relatively consistent throughout the year, but capture of adult Atlantic salmon was limited to August (28 : 1 brown trout to salmon caught). Abundance of parr and smolt was greater in spring and summer, a pattern consistent between species, with the exception of a large pulse of salmon smolt during one day. Atlantic salmon and brown trout young of year were largely offspring of anadromous females, while brook charr young of year were largely offspring of resident females. Brook charr were bigger than Atlantic salmon at post emergence midstream, upstream and end of growing season upstream. Brown trout were bigger than Atlantic salmon at post emergence midstream, while the opposite was found at end of growing season downstream. No size differences were found between brown trout and brook charr. Otolith core Sr concentration was not a function of rearing habitat and laser ablation can clearly distinguish between freshwater and marine environments using a "drilling" or retrospective technique.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".